W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Fw: Web IDL spec nitpick: SHOULD and SHOULD NOT?

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 18:25:07 +1300
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Cc: jhartman@google.com
Message-ID: <20101008052506.GC3608@wok.mcc.id.au>
Jed Hartman:
> I have one tiny nitpicky comment about something that caught my eye in
> passing.  The spec says:
> 
> > The keywords “must”, “must not”, “required”, “shall”, “shall not”,
> > “recommended”, “may” and “optional” in this document are to be
> > interpreted as described in Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
> > Requirement Levels [RFC2119].
> 
> I'm thinking that "SHOULD" and "SHOULD NOT" should be added to that
> list (right after "SHALL" and "SHALL NOT").

Fixed, thanks!

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Friday, 8 October 2010 05:25:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:03 UTC