http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11335 Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |davep@iit.edu --- Comment #3 from Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu> 2010-11-18 00:22:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > My reading of "No X may have a Y" is "There must not be an X that has a Y" - > that is, it is a prescriptive statement, not a permissive one. That's the way I read it, too. And I agree that RFC2119 prefers "MUST NOT" to "MAY not", even if they technically mean the same thing. (But since they mean the same thing, it's truly a minor editorial fix.) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.Received on Thursday, 18 November 2010 00:22:44 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 18 November 2010 00:22:47 GMT