TAB-1547 issue w/ CAMP 1.2

[Anish Karmarkar <anish.karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Patrick,

The CAMP TC would like to understand TAB-1547 
(https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/TAB-1547) that was filed with the 
priority as "blocker".

The issue states the following:

"That is to say that the conformance requirements defined in Appendix 
C.2 Non-Mandatory, are discarded and rendered nugatory by this 
definition of conformance targets. Why SHOULD and MAY requirements are 
defined only to be ignored isn't clear.

SHOULD and MAY carry less force than SHALL but for interchange purposes, 
are not valueless. "

Appedix C.1 and C.2 are used in defining what a particular conformance 
target has to do to *claim* *conformance*. To claim conformance one has 
to comply with all the "SHALL"s and not the "SHOULD"s and "MAY"s. Not 
being necessary for *claiming* *conformance* does not make them 
irrelevant. "SHOULD"s "MAY"s are quite important for implementers and 
for interop/portability. "SHALL"s sets only the minimum bar for 
conformant implementations.

Perhaps you could elaborate on the issue to help the CAMP TC understand 
it better (?).

Thanks.

--Anish