RE: dwbp-ISSUE-135 (BernadetteLoscio): Use of RFC2119 [Best practices document(s)]

I'd like to support Antoine’s comment in Issue-135.  

It seems to me that in a lot of cases, the grammatical subject of the sentences with the RFC2119 verbs is wrong. For example in BP1 Intended outcome:

"Data consumers MUST be able to" could maybe be formulated as:
"Data publishers MUST provide sufficient metadata so that data consumers can"

In BP2 Intended outcome:

"Humans MUST be able to read metadata related to a dataset", maybe better:
“Data publishers MUST provide metadata related to a dataset in a format that can be read by humans"

In BP3, another issue, less serious -- I was taught in writing class to avoid passive voice:

"Metadata SHOULD be provided using standard vocabularies", maybe better:
"Data publishers SHOULD provide metadata using standard vocabularies"

Makx.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Issue Tracker
> [mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 6:01 PM
> To: public-dwbp-wg@w3.org
> Subject: dwbp-ISSUE-135 (BernadetteLoscio): Use of RFC2119 [Best
> practices document(s)]
> 
> dwbp-ISSUE-135 (BernadetteLoscio): Use of RFC2119 [Best practices
> document(s)]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/135
> 
> Raised by: Antoine Isaac
> On product: Best practices document(s)
> 
> Do we over-use RFC2119, or don't use it with the correct sentences?
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 18:18:34 UTC