- From: <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:18:44 +0100
- To: "DeltaV" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
"Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu> wrote: > > From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com] > > > > Actually, I think the problem is that I (do other readers?) still > > don't look in the preconditions and postconditions for normative > > requirements. I think of them as error/status codes, but in fact a > > lot of the postconditions make requirements. > > > > That would be a problem, because the majority of the normative > > requirements are specified in the pre and post conditions. The > > introductory text provides motivation and guidance, but the > > pre and post conditions are the actual specification of functionality. > > > > For the record, I have found this confusing on multiple occasions as well. What can I add? They are an integral part of the specification and should be read carefully and understood. At least for me, the layout and style do not imply that pre/post-conditions may be glossed over or ignored. In fact, I find it useful to have the conditions stated explicitly in this way, and _named_ for easy reference. Tim
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 06:03:40 UTC