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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

camp message

[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

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.


Hope you are having a great week!


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]