Re: new template.net form...
Piet, Thanks for the grammar clean-up! Though I'm not sure about the distinction you are making between "complies" and "will comply". I'll have to run that one by the lawyers. Just kidding. :-) But I will run it by some others here just to be sure we aren't taking the law unto ourselves, so to speak. --Steve W.
From: Piet.Beertema@mcsun.EU.net To: skw@merit.edu Subject: Re: new template.net form... Cc: regional-techs@merit.edu Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 11:42:54 +0200
Comment about the (new) NACR template:
---- Network Announcement Change Request ----
The networks which request access to the NSFNET backbone agree that traffic from the networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone comply with the ^^^ "NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY" dated June 1992.
The leading "The" unequivocally denotes the networks for which the NACR is submitted, but the marked "the" can equally well denote the networks in the NACR as "networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone" in general. Since the latter in general is not under the control of the networks mentioned in the NACR, this "the" should be replaced by "these". I spotted this quite some time ago already and I'm consistently using "these" in my NACR's, but sofar I just forgot to notify you. Sorry for that. And to get even more picky ;-) note that the word "comply" stands for the traffic, not the networks, and thus should be "complies" or "will comply" (the latter wording is better, since no one can be 100% sure, one can always try the best and make a promise).
All in all this leads to the suggestion to change the text into:
The following networks, which request access to the NSFNET backbone, agree that traffic from these networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone will comply with the "NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY" dated June 1992.
Piet
Though I'm not sure about the distinction you are making between "complies" and "will comply". You're right: the words "that will transit the NSFNET backbone" makes "will comply" superfluous, so "complies" will do. But I will run it by some others here just to be sure we aren't taking the law unto ourselves, so to speak. Of course! OK, after this first pass through the text, I'm getting even more picky: networks cannot agree to anything, only their administrators can! So here's my latest & greatest proposal for a new text: The administrators of the following networks for which access is requested to the NSFNET backbone, agree that traffic from these networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone complies with the "NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY" dated June 1992 Piet
| Though I'm not sure about the distinction you are making between | "complies" and "will comply". | You're right: the words "that will transit the NSFNET backbone" | makes "will comply" superfluous, so "complies" will do. | | But I will run it by some others here just to be sure we aren't | taking the law unto ourselves, so to speak. | Of course! | | OK, after this first pass through the text, I'm getting | even more picky: networks cannot agree to anything, only | their administrators can! So here's my latest & greatest | proposal for a new text: | | The administrators of the following networks for which access is | requested to the NSFNET backbone, agree that traffic from these | networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone complies with the | "NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY" dated June 1992 | | Piet There is a missing comma. One should be placed after the word "networks" on the first line.
| OK, after this first pass through the text, I'm getting | even more picky: networks cannot agree to anything, only | their administrators can! So here's my latest & greatest | proposal for a new text: | | The administrators of the following networks for which access is | requested to the NSFNET backbone, agree that traffic from these | networks that will transit the NSFNET backbone complies with the | "NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY" dated June 1992 | | Piet There is a missing comma. One should be placed after the word "networks" on the first line. Yech, you're spoiling the perfect layout. :-) But I'm wondering if adding that comma is indeed appropriate: the way I read the sentence then, the "for which" denotes the administrators, not the networks. Piet
participants (3)
-
jtaylor@cac.washington.edu
-
Piet.Beertema@mcsun.EU.net
-
skw