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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

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

Subject: Not specific to this attribute, example only


While proofing this morning I read:

The defined values for the dr3d:texture-filter attribute are:

  • disabled: texture filtering should not be enabled.

  • enabled: texture filtering should be enabled.

Unrelated to this particular attribute there have been discussions about how to extract all the shall/should/may clauses and this is an example of one of those.

My question is that in a future revision, should attribute settings be advisory?

That is if the setting is "enabled," then why should we permit an application to ignore than setting?

I can understand if an application doesn't support it, that would be a reason to not support it but that should be a question of level of conformance. Yes?

That is: "enabled: textual filtering is enabled."

My application can say: I conform to the level that does not honor dr3d:texture-filter attribute settings.

Something for ODF-Next but I would like to tighten up what we say and provide applications with a way to explicitly opt out of support for what we define.

Hope everyone is having a great week!

Patrick Durusau
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau

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