- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:25:54 +1000
- To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Up until now, we've had this to say about the status of SHOULDs regarding conformance (p1, "Conformance and Error Handling): > An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of the requirements associated with the roles it partakes in HTTP. Note that SHOULD-level requirements are relevant here, unless one of the documented exceptions is applicable. After reviewing the specs (and taking in account the misused SHOULDs and those I think should be stronger, see previous messages), I believe that ALL of the remaining SHOULDs in the set are NOT relevant to conformance, but instead represent implementation guidance. So, I propose we change the text above in p1 to: """ An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of the MUST-level requirements associated with the roles it partakes in HTTP. Note that SHOULD-level requirements are relevant to conformance, but do not formally impact it; instead, they represent implementation guidance. """ Thoughts? -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2013 02:26:20 UTC