[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (ODATA-382) Conformance clauses need to refer to sections defining aspects of conformance and do so uniformly

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/ODATA-382?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=33385#action_33385 ] 

Stefan Drees commented on ODATA-382:
------------------------------------

I second this proposal fully and the given description mostly.

As conformance also has different audiences, we offer many interleaved scenarios to group naturally.

This makes it hard to liniearize by numbering (but of course this is not undoable)

This also applies somehow to the second editorial hint inside the description, as we try to give hints which steps to take to offer the best OData service possible when operating under conformance class XYZ in scenario ABC, the mix of MUST and SHOULD was thoughtfull. Of course, if this does not reach the "consumer" of the document, it must be made more clear (or otherwise some SHOULD details be stripped) IMO.

Of course a sentence including MUST followed by a MUST NOT should well defend itself or be changed into a "decided version".

> Conformance clauses need to refer to sections defining aspects of conformance and do so uniformly
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ODATA-382
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/ODATA-382
>             Project: OASIS Open Data Protocol (OData) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: OData ATOM Format , OData CSDL, OData JSON Format
>    Affects Versions: V4.0_CSD01
>            Reporter: Patrick Durusau
>
> Some conformance clauses in ODATA CSDL have hyperlinks to other parts of CSDL and others do not. Hyperlinks are useful but explicit references to the sections in question + hyperlinks would be better. And either way, they need to be uniform for all conformance clauses.
> As an editorial nit, I would number all the sub-clauses for conformance. 
> Another editorial nit, I would not mix must, must not and should clauses. 
> Need to review for consistency, see: return 501 Not Implemented for any unsupported functionality (with a hyperlink under minimal conformance) versus 501 Not Implemented for any unsupported functionality (no hyperlink under intermediate conformance)
> FYI, I have not compared the content of the conformance clauses to the sections that define them for this issue. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira