humanmarkup message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [humanmarkup] Additional question for OASIS wrt First Working Draft ofHM.Requirements
- From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
- To: karl.best@oasis-open.org, humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org,humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:16:44 -0800
Title: Additional question for OASIS wrt First Working
Draft
Hello Everyone,
I have an additional question to ask Karl
about, with my apologies to all for neglecting it in my previous post.
It appears I am quite human, at least as far as having the
characteristic of forgetfulness, as well as the characteristic of
rechecking my work for instances of that tendency.
In the second subsection under TERMINOLOGY
we cite a reference to:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
for standard definitions of operational
terms MUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, SHALL, etc. The question is
whether we are allowed to do this, or does OASIS have an approved
reference we could or should use instead? If the answer to both
questions is negative, and we decide to use the actual wording of the
ietf rfc memo, should we cite the source?
Regards,
Rex Brooks
OASIS HumanMarkup Vice Chair, Secretary and Webmaster
--
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC