OASIS Open Mailing List Archives  ·  All Lists  ·  opencsa-liaison  ·  2007-12

opencsa-liaison — archive

[Date Prev]  |  [Thread Prev]  |  [Thread Next]  |  [Date Next]   —  [Date Index]  |  [Thread Index]  |  [Month Index]  |  [List Home]

RE: [opencsa-liaison] Use of "may", "must", etc.



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:  [email protected]



"Martin Chapman" <[email protected]>

10/12/2007 22:12

To
"'Michael Rowley'" <[email protected]>, "'Anish Karmarkar'" <[email protected]>, Mike Edwards/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc
<[email protected]>
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.


[Date Prev]  |  [Thread Prev]  |  [Thread Next]  |  [Date Next]   —  [Date Index]  |  [Thread Index]  |  [Month Index]  |  [List Home]