- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 20:48:23 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28011 Bug ID: 28011 Summary: Redefining RFC 2119 may and must Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Candidate Recommendation Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Functions and Operators 3.1 Assignee: mike@saxonica.com Reporter: patrick@durusau.net QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org Created attachment 1574 --> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=1574&action=edit The history of RFC2119 usage at W3C and the redefinition mistake. Section 1.6.3 Conformance terminology redefines may and must and does not follow RFC 2119. I have traced the error back to Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition), http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006, which used the definitions of may and must found in FO31. Those definitions were abandoned in Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Third Edition), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204, citing RFC 2119 instead and that practice, of citing RFC 2119 has continued to date. Unfortunately, XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/, fell between XML 1.0 2nd edition and XML 1.0 3rd edition. The redefining of RFC 2119, abandoned for ten (10) years now, should be avoided here for the sake of interoperability. I have attached a longer document that treats the history of this error more extensively. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 13 February 2015 20:48:25 UTC