Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] OASIS Guidelines to Writing ConformanceClauses

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

jose lorenzo <hozelda@yahoo.com> wrote on 06/23/2008
03:42:46 PM:


> From http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCHandbook/
> ConformanceGuidelines.html :
> >> ... OASIS specifications SHOULD use the following keywords
from 
> IETF RFC 2119. This is the default terminology to be used in all 
> OASIS specifications. The definitions from RFC 2119 are given below,
> and have been simplified to highlight all the keywords:
> 
> and later:
> >> Some OASIS specifications are intended for advancement to
other 
> bodies such as ISO/IEC and ITU-T. In those cases it is permissible
> to use the ISO keywords instead of the default RFC 2119 ones. A 
> specification that makes use of ISO keywords MUST explicitly declare
> this in the specification.
> 
> So my question is, are we using the default rfc2119 which we 
> "should" use, or are we using the ISO/IEC definitions which
could 
> apply to an ODF intended to become an ISO standard, and which we 
> would then have to "explicitly declare"?
> 
> Though the ODF TC words ODF, we (ie, the proposed TC) pen the 
> testing guide so might need to know (or benefit from knowing) the
context.
> 

We talking here about the keywords used is indicating
normative statements in the work of the proposed TC, namely test requirements
documents, profiles, etc.  Nothing we do changes the keywords in the
ODF standard itself.

So with that as preface, I believe that we will want
to use the ISO keywords.  Two reasons for this:

1) It will make it much clearer to read.  It
would be confusing, I think, to have a profile that uses ODF (with ISO
keywords) for most of its functionality, but then restricts or extends
that functionality using RFC 2119 keywords.

2) We may want to advance a profile or a conformity
assessment methodology document to ISO.

-Rob