[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (CAMP-84) Text highlighting, Section 2.1.6 and following (camp-spec-v1.1-csprd01)
[ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-84?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=34470#action_34470 ] Martin Chapman commented on CAMP-84: ------------------------------------- additional info from Patrick from an email exchange: I had seen the appendix and wondered about its use by the conformance clause. In part because you find instances like: RE-16 Because of the unique function of this resource, future versions of the CAMP specification SHALL NOT make non-backwards compatible changes to this resource. I'm not sure that is a meaningful statement without more context to define "resource." In addition to not being a normative requirement on implementors but on the TC that produces future CAMP specs. Yes? Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 08/22/2013 11:36 AM, Martin Chapman wrote: > Good point - yes we use highlighting to emphasise rfc2119 sentences > - they are then summarized in a table in the appendix! Easily > resolved by stating this when we introduce notation. > > Martin. > > Text highlighting, Section 2.1.6 and following (camp-spec-v1.1-csprd01) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CAMP-84 > URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-84 > Project: OASIS Cloud Application Management for Platforms (CAMP) TC > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Public Review > Environment: csprd01 > Reporter: Martin Chapman > > From Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> > Copied from the comment list: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/camp-comment/201308/msg00002.html > Greetings! > Starting at Section 2.1.6, the last paragraph has this text: > *** > An Application Component Template SHALL be referenced by a single > Assembly Template. [CO-01] An Assembly Template SHALL NOT be > instantiated until all of its Application Component Templates are > successfully instantiated. > *** > highlighted in pink/orange? Sorry, I'm not very good with colors, but > distinct from the surrounding text in any event. > After looking at a number of instances of this highlighting, it > appears to be used when RFC 2119 keywords appear in the text. > I did not find (overlooked?) any mention of why these passages were > highlighted in the spec. > Is this an artifact of the editing process and meant to be removed? > If not, some explanation of why the text is highlighted would be > helpful. Although, text that does not use RFC 2119 keywords is just as > normative as text that does (the latter voicing requirements) so I'm > not sure it is useful to the general reader. > BTW, to resolve this after public review should be a non-substantive > change since none of the text would change, just its coloring. > Hope everyone is having a great day! > Patrick > PS: The highlighting occurs in the PDF, Word, and, HTML versions of > camp-spec-v1.1-csprd01. -- 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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]