Re: [wsrp] Conformance language

[Rich Thompson <richt2@us.ibm.com>]

Section 2 has a list of the words http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
defines; namely:
"The
key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT,
RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL in this document are to be interpreted as
described in [RFC2119]."

Note that REQUIRED (same meaning as
MUST) and RECOMMENDED (same meaning as SHOULD) are among them.

Rich

Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>

06/02/05 10:27 AM

To	wsrp <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[wsrp] Conformance language

At various places in WSRP1.0 (and a few times in WSRP2.0),
there are 
conformance-looking words like REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED etc.

For example, there is a statement in sec 8.2

"For security reasons related to exposing the existence of something
the 
caller is not allowed to access, it is RECOMMENDED that a AccessDenied
fault be generated ..."

To my knowledge, these are not conformance related, and I was wondering
if we should use normal casing for these words. If these are important
enough, we should probably consider using conformance words like MAY, 
MUST or SHOULD.

Comments?

Regards,

Subbu

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php