RE: For consideration of specification authors

I find the new keywords very useful in describing many of the conformance requirements in our documents and have applied them appropriately.

From: odata@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:odata@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Ericson, George
Sent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 7:21 AM
To: Handl, Ralf <ralf.handl@sap.com>; odata@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [odata] RE: For consideration of specification authors

The proposed additional flexibility doesn’t seem helpful with respect to promoting interoperability.

In my experience, specifications are well served by following: ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, Principles and rules for the structure and drafting of ISO and IEC documents.

I recommend converting to the use of the terms: should, shall not, should, should not, may, may not, can, cannot, and must as specified in clause 7 of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.

Regards,

George

From: odata@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:odata@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Handl, Ralf
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2017 6:55 AM
To: odata@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [odata] For consideration of specification authors

Specification authors should have a look at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6919 when reworking the V4.01 specifications. Some of these new normative keywords might come in handy.

Cheers!
Ralf

        In preparing for battle
        I have always found that plans are useless,
        but planning is indispensable.
        - Dwight D. Eisenhower

odata message