[OASIS Issue Tracker] (WSCALENDAR-523) It is not clear what are the conformance targets and the conformance requirements are not clearly assigned to these.

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

     [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/WSCALENDAR-523?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

William Cox updated WSCALENDAR-523:
-----------------------------------

    Affects Version/s: PIM CSPRD02

> It is not clear what are the conformance targets and the conformance requirements are not clearly assigned to these.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WSCALENDAR-523
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/WSCALENDAR-523
>             Project: OASIS Web Services Calendar (WS-Calendar) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: PIM
>    Affects Versions: PIM CSPRD02
>         Environment: TAB Comments
>            Reporter: Toby Considine
>            Assignee: William Cox
>             Fix For: PIM WD11
>
>
> It is not clear what are the conformance targets and the conformance requirements are not clearly assigned to these. [Applies to section 9 line 621] 
> The conformance rules/clauses should more explicitly refer to a notion of implementation. What is supposed to conform?When reading the beginning of 9.2 [line 630] and in 9.2.1, one understands that "specifications" are conformance targets of interest. 
> But then, in 9.2.5 [line 703] and 9.2.6, new conformance targets appear such as Intervals, Bounded Intervals, Sequences (and Services?) . 
> Aren't such elements just parts of a "specification"? is there a need to distinguish them as separate, standalone conformance targets? 
> Is it expected that Intervals or Sequences will claim separately conformance to WS-Calendar? 
> 9.2.6 seems to also address "Specifications" in spite of its title. 
> To make all this clearer it would be better to clearly list all the possible types of conformance targets at the beginning of the conformance section - then for each, to make a separate conformance clause. (with the understanding that it makes sense to claim conformance separately for each) But also, several conformance requirements e.g. in 9.2.6 read more like normative requirements that belong to the body of the specification. Any reason to have them in the conformance section instead?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)