Folks,
There is no clear one way of doing this
- different specs do it in different ways -
compare:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/
with
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/opera-widgets-specification-1-0/
The XHTML spec has some sections clearly
labelled "normative" and others marked "informative".
The Opera Widgets spec is all treated
as normative (and then goes on to abuse RFC 2119 wording...).
It will certainly be simpler to mark
example sections as "informative" and then not worry about the
wording
in those at all. There is probably
far less burden to this approach.
Yours, Mike.
Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
Email:
"Martin Chapman"
<>
10/12/2007 22:12
To
"'Michael Rowley'" <>,
"'Anish Karmarkar'" <>, Mike
Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc
<>
Subject
RE: [opencsa-liaison] Use of "may",
"must", etc.
One certainly could mark sections
as informative and normative and make the RFC2119 rules apply only to normative
sections, but I really don't see why we have to go through this. I have
always been able to find a substitute, and I think with a bit of practice
we can all get the hang of things. Maybe you can provide a sample that
you think is not translatable and I'll try and write an equivalent. Otherwise
I remain unconvinced.
Martin.
