Re: [wsrp] Conformance language

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

Thanks. I overlooked it.

Subbu

Rich Thompson wrote:
> 
> Section 2 has a list of the words http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt 
> defines; namely:
> "The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, 
> SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL in this document are to be 
> interpreted as described in */[RFC2119]/*."
> 
> Note that REQUIRED (same meaning as MUST) and RECOMMENDED (same meaning 
> as SHOULD) are among them.
> 
> Rich
> 
> 
> *Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>*
> 
> 06/02/05 10:27 AM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	wsrp <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	[wsrp] Conformance language
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At various places in WSRP1.0 (and a few times in WSRP2.0), there are
> conformance-looking words like REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED etc.
> 
> For example, there is a statement in sec 8.2
> 
> "For security reasons related to exposing the existence of something the
> caller is not allowed to access, it is RECOMMENDED that a AccessDenied
> fault be generated ..."
> 
> To my knowledge, these are not conformance related, and I was wondering
> if we should use normal casing for these words. If these are important
> enough, we should probably consider using conformance words like MAY,
> MUST or SHOULD.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Subbu
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> 
>