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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tag-comment message

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

Subject: RE: [tag-comment] Test Assertions for Normative Statements in theebBP v2.0.4 spec

Hi Dennis,

Thanks for this.

I have already read the Conformance Guideline and do agree with you that the guideline provides quite clear definition for the terms and that the checklist have some valuable information. However, if you look at the checklist,not everything is clearly measurable. For Example if you consider this statement "Are all Normative Statements understandable, clear, and concise?", what is clear and what is concise? How do we measure them? To me the information provided are more like a template which is more concerned about the structure of the normative statements, etc., rather than a guideline on how to define the normative statement from more technical/semantic point of view. 

I still think there should be another dimension for categorising normative statement. This would greatly facilitate formalising them in my opinion. After puting them in categories, we may decide that not all of them could be formalised or perhaps some other conclusions which may facilitate conformance check.

From: Dennis E. Hamilton [himself@orcmid.com]
Sent: 02 March 2011 22:08
To: Bahareh Heravi; tag-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: david.snelling@uk.fujitsu.com; JDurand@us.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [tag-comment] Test Assertions for Normative Statements in the ebBP v2.0.4 spec

For OASIS work, there are two documents that are applicable, located from here:

In the Conformance Guidelines the Terms and Definitions are valuable, especially with regard to Conformance Target and its relationship to Conformance Clauses and the normative provisions that fall under those clauses.

Also, for familiarization, I think the section 6 checklist includes valuable information on what is intended to be accomplished beyond the fundamental, to me, expectation with regard to all conformance targets: that when a standard is designed to foster interoperability, the specification is sufficient for implementers skilled in the related art to provide interoperable implementations of a target without having to consult any implementation itself (though of course one wants to confirm interoperability by testing with other implementations).

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Bahareh Heravi [mailto:Bahareh.Heravi@brunel.ac.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:04
To: 'dennis.hamilton@acm.org'; 'tag-comment@lists.oasis-open.org'
Cc: 'david.snelling@uk.fujitsu.com'; 'JDurand@us.fujitsu.com'
Subject: RE: [tag-comment] Test Assertions for Normative Statements in the ebBP v2.0.4 spec

Hi Denis,

Thank you very much for your response.

I believe there should possibly be a guideline for defining normative statements themselves, if already doesn’t exist (I am not aware of such thing). If it does exist, I guess there are rooms for significant changes / improvements. Furthermore, I am thinking of categorising the normative statements, so that we may employ different scales and measurements for them. By category, I mean something different to their prescription level. [ ... ]

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