[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Status of Committee Specification Draft 02 -- earlier (Re: [office] Agenda for ODF TC Teleconference Monday, 17 August 2020)
Hi Svante The short answers to your questions are: 1. No. In fact, typographic highlighting of words such as "shall" is not allowed in standards developed within the ISO process. The purpose of styling such words with a named character style is, so far as I understand it, not in order to make them appear different to the human reader of the text, but as an aid to the editors and possibly to users of the HTML version checking which provisions are mandatory, which are recommended, which are optional, and which behaviours are forbidden. 2. According to ISO editors, who were recently asked this question, a paragraph is non-normative if it doesn't contain any ISO keywords. In fact, ISO now say that, apart from indicating that a whole Appendix is non-normative (actually they use the word "informative"), by adding the word "informative" to the subtitle of the Appendix, such wording is not necessary and should be avoided. I disagree that styling of ISO keywords can be completely automated. There are definitely contexts in English, such as in subordinate clauses, where the use of "may" is correct (its use as a subjunctive verb, for example) but is not to be interpreted as an ISO keyword. I don't believe that it would be practical to implement the natural-language processing that would be necessary to check all such instances. However, since uses of "shall", "shall not", "should" and "should not" should always be in the strict sense, checks on these terms could be automated. Kind regards, Francis Sent from my iPad
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]