W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > October 2005

Re: Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2005 Oct 12

From: John.Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:04:41 -0400
To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20051017200441.GC9624@NYCMJCOWA2>

Grosso, Paul scripsit:

> ACTION to John:  Search for use of must and should
> related to the behavior of applications in XML 1.x.

Except as noted, these comments apply to both XML 1.0 and XML 1.1.

Dubious mMUSTs:

in the definition of "match": replace "MUST be" with "are", since this is a
definition, not a specification of behavior.

in the definition of "enumerated attributes":  this is not really a definition,
and should be sorted into two sentences, a definition with "is" and a specification
with "mMUST".

Section 3.4: the explanations of INCLUDE and IGNORE should read "MUST be processed"
instead of "MUST be considered".  Considering is not something XML processors
are equipped to do.

Dubious SHOULDs:

The remark in Section 2.13 (of XML 1.1) that XML applications that create
XML 1.1 output from either XML 1.1 or XML 1.0 input SHOULD ensure that
the output is fully normalized" is a constraint on applications, but
it is on applications that *write* XML, and as such is analogous to a
constraint on document authors.

A similar remark is found at the end of Section 5.1 in XML 1.1, and should
also be left alone.

Dubious MAYs:

It seems to me that most of the MAYs in the document are not genuine RFC 2119
MAYs (truly optional behavior) but represent choices that XML provides to
document authors.  I recommend that only the following ones be retained:

	definitions of "error", "fatal error", and "at user option"
	in 2.5, "an XML processor MAY"
	in 2.10, a"an XML processor MAY report the error or MAY recover"
	in 2.13 (XML 1.1), "the processor MAY, at user option, ignore"
	in 3.2, "an XML processor MAY issue a warning"
	in 3.3, "At user option, an XML processor MAY issue a warning"
	also in 3.3, "an XML processor MAY at user option issue a warning"
	in 4.2, "an XML processor MAY issue a warning"
	in 4.3.3, "entities encoded in UTF-8 MAY begin"
	in 4.4.3, "the processor MAY, but need not, include"
	in 4.7, "They MAY additionally resolve the external identifier"

All other MAYs should be changed to plain "may".

My confusion is rapidly waxing          John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing:            jcowan@reutershealth.com
    I'd use DTDs                        http://www.reutershealth.com
    If they had local trees --          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.
Received on Monday, 17 October 2005 20:04:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:35 UTC