OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [dita] Must and should wording in the DITA spec


We're not following ISO rules - we cite IETF RFC 2119:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.2/os/spec/introduction/c-terminology.html#terminology

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Total Information Experience (TIE) Technology Strategist
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25



From:        JoAnn Hackos <joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com>
To:        Kristen James Eberlein <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>, DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>,
Date:        11/05/2013 11:31 AM
Subject:        Re: [dita] Must and should wording in the DITA spec
Sent by:        <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>




This is the official definition from ISO. The word "must" should not be used.

"Throughout this International Standard, "shall" is used to express a provision that is binding, "should" to express a recommendation among other possibilities, and "may" to indicate a course of action permissible within the limits of this International Standard. "

Hope this helps.


JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD
President
Comtech Services Inc.
710 Kipling Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80215
Joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com
303-232-7586

 
Comtech Logo 2005 small
 
CIDM will be hosting the Content Management Strategies/DITA Europe Conference 2013 in Munich, Germany November 18-19. More information at:
http://www.infomanagementcenter.com/DITAeurope/2013/index.htm




From: Kristen James Eberlein <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>
Date:
Tuesday, November 5, 2013 6:03 AM
To:
DITA TC <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject:
[dita] Must and should wording in the DITA spec


I've started working on cleaning up the "must," "should," and "may" wording in the spec. I need feedback about the following paragraph from the conref topic (highlighting added):

If the referenced element has a @conref attribute specified, the above rules should be applied recursively with the resolved element from one referencing/referenced combination becoming one of the two elements participating in the next referencing/referenced combination. The result should preserve without generalization all elements that are valid in the originating context, even if they are not valid in an intermediate context. For example, if topicA and topicC allow highlighting, and topicB does not, then a content reference chain of topicA->topicB->topicC should preserve any highlighting elements in the referenced content. The result, however it is achieved, must be equivalent to the result of resolving the conref pairs recursively starting from the original referencing element in topicA.

You can read the paragraph in context at
http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.2/os/spec/archSpec/conref.html#conref

My sense is that either all words need to be "must" or all three need to be "should" -- not the above mixture. Thoughts?

--
Best,
Kris

Kristen James Eberlein
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
Co-chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee

www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]