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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

obix message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Checking Conformance Clauses (UNCLASSIFIED)

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: FOUO

I reviewed the OASIS Conformance Guidelines (http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCHandbook/ConformanceGuidelines.html#_Toc170119665) and have provided my response to checklist items in bullets under the numbered checklist items.




Conformance Checklist

  1. Are you using the right keywords from RFC 2119, and in uppercase?
    • YES
  2. If you are using ISO keywords, have you explicitly stated this in the specification ?
    • N/A
  3. Have you defined your Conformance Target(s)?
    • Yes – implicit through statements of “conforming oBIX Client” or “conforming oBIX server”
  4. Are all Normative Statements clearly identifiable?
    • YES
  5. Are all Normative Statements understandable, clear, and concise?
    • YES with one exception (20.1.2 (line 2699) “An implementation MUST return values according to the rules defined in Clause 4.  “  Where is Clause 4?)
  6. Are all Normative Statements referenced directly or indirectly from a Conformance Clause?
    • Yes, but recommend numbering the normative statements in each conformance clause section and providing a one sentence introduction before the normative statements (e.g. The oBIX server MUST meet the following conditions to satisfy the Lobby Conformance Clause:…)
  7. Note: A Normative Statement that is not related to any Conformance Clause has no meaning
  8. Is each Normative Statement related to a Conformance Target(s)?
    • Yes, they are in sub-sections of conformance clauses
  9. Is there a separate section containing the Conformance Clauses?
    • Yes, Section 20.1 and 20.2
  10. Are all Conformance Clauses clearly identifiable?
    • Yes, there are subsections for each conformance clause.  Though they are not explicitly identified as “Conformance Clauses,” the symbolism is implicit
  11. Are all Conformance Clauses understandable, clear, and concise?
    • YES but see #5
  12. Are the top-level Conformance Clauses clearly identified and related to a Conformance Target?
    • Yes
  13. Is the relationship between all Conformance Clauses clearly defined using combinations of combined, alternative, level and profile styles?
    • Yes
  14. Are all Conformance Clauses either top-level or referenced directly or indirectly from a top-level Conformance Clause?
    • Implicity, yes, through statements such as “An implementation conforms to this specification as an oBIX Server if it meets the conditions described in the following subsections.”  It is recommended that “the following subsections) be directly referenced (e.g. …the conditions described in Sections 20.1.1, 20.1.2, and 20.1.3)
  15. Note: A Conformance Clause that is not related to any top-level Conformance Clause has no meaning.
  16. Are there any contradictions between Normative Statements on the one hand and a Conformance Clause and any referenced Conformance Clauses on the other hand? If there are, have these been explicitly noted and have any rules to over-ride the contradictions been made
    • It depends on what encodings we include in 1.1.  The statement, “An implementation SHOULD support the XML encoding,” (lines 2694-2695 and 2709-2709) may be invalid if there are no other alternatives in which case the implementation MUST support the XML encoding



Chris Bogen, Ph.D.

Computer Scientist

US Army Corps of Engineers

Engineer Research Development Center

Vicksburg, MS


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: FOUO

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]