[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Issue 15: Use of the word OPTIONAL
For what it's worth, some W3C specs use the non-uppercase form. The SVG spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/REC-SVG-20010904.pdf), for instance, states: "Within this specification, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 (see [RFC2119]). However, for readability, these words do not appear in all uppercase letters in this specification." -Philippe -----Original Message----- From: David Fischer [mailto:david@drummondgroup.com] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 7:57 AM To: Martin W Sachs Cc: ebXML Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Issue 15: Use of the word OPTIONAL Marty, your characterization of the RFC2119 words gives me great pause. If you were correct, then we must erase these words from our vocabulary -- which certainly was not the intent of the RFC. I must strongly disagree concerning those words used in non-upper case (*must* as opposed to *MUST*). Standard usage in RFCs has been strictly with ALL CAPS. This has also been true throughout the development process of TRP/ebXML-MS and in all our discussions. However, just be sure, I went to the IETF and asked. The answers so far have been in favor of only ALL CAPS (see attached) invoking the definitions in 2119. They do acknowledge the confusion as you have cited. One interesting example was the word May -- the name of a month. Should this also be an RFC2119 key word? I'm sorry Marty, but the 2119 definitions only apply to ALL CAPS, unless we define otherwise in our specification. We have been VERY careful with these words and we have only used them (the ALL CAPS versions) when we really mean the 2119 definitions -- including our use of OPTIONAL. Regards, David. Note: If more responses come in from the IETF, I will be happy to forward them. -----Original Message----- From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 4:59 PM To: David Fischer Cc: Doug Bunting; ebXML Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Issue 15: Use of the word OPTIONAL Conformance to RFC2119 means that the word OPTIONAL (or optional) means that an implementer does not have to provide that which is stated as optional. We don't want to confuse anyone into thinking that non-required elements or attributes do not have to be provided by implementers. Don't assume that implementers will catch on. The words in a specification have to be precise. Regards, Marty **************************************************************************** **** ***** Martin W. Sachs IBM T. J. Watson Research Center P. O. B. 704 Yorktown Hts, NY 10598 914-784-7287; IBM tie line 863-7287 Notes address: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM Internet address: mwsachs @ us.ibm.com **************************************************************************** **** ***** David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> on 02/12/2002 05:36:53 PM To: Doug Bunting <dougb62@yahoo.com>, ebXML <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org> cc: Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Issue 15: Use of the word OPTIONAL I'm still not sure why it is not either definition and why this is not allowed? Section 1.1.1 says "An implementation which does not include a particular option MUST be prepared to interoperate with another implementation which does include the option, though perhaps with reduced functionality." Our spec simply defines *reduced functionality* as an Error of NotSupported. I'm not sure why this change is needed? We need to limit out discussions to essential changes. Regards, David -----Original Message----- From: Doug Bunting [mailto:dougb62@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 4:09 PM To: ebXML Subject: [ebxml-msg] Issue 15: Use of the word OPTIONAL David has disagreed with Chris' statement that OPTIONAL is misused (according to 2119) in a number of contexts. The basic issue here is a conflict between something that may or may not appear in an instance of an ebXML message and something that must or may be implemented by a compliant ebMS system. In the specified uses of the word OPTIONAL, the first is meant but our document conventions (section 1.1.1) restricts us to using OPTIONAL only when the second is intended. I would strongly recommend making the change Chris suggested. thanx, doug ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC