- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 23:59:04 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28011 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com --- Comment #6 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> --- For the record, it is not quite true that XML 1.0 2e was the first XML spec not to cite RFC 2119; the first edition also did not cite RFC 2119, but defined 'may' and 'must' in words modeled on those in ISO specs the editors knew and trusted. One reason to be cautious about the definitions in RFC 2119 is the casual circularity of the definition of 'MUST', which may perhaps be best illustrated if we replace the crucial words with words we do not in fact already know: 1. MAUN This word, or the terms "FARBLED" or "GRANFALLOON", mean that the definition is an absolute farblement of the specification. OK. So we use the word FARBLED if the definition is a FARBLEMENT. And a FARBLEMENT, we may infer, is something that is FARBLED. How that relates to anything else in the world is not clear to this reader. It's not hard to do better; though I say it myself, I think the XML spec did. Another reason is that the definitions in RFC 2119 are made awkward by the text's strenuous effort not to say what kinds of things it is talking about -- an effort which however fails in the course of the paragraph on MAY, which finally gives in and mentions 'implementations'. It is hard for this reader to see how to apply the definitions given in cases where a spec governs something other than software. The only reason that the flaws in RFC 2119's definitions are not catastrophic is that as far as I can tell no one ever, ever pays any attention whatsoever to the definition of these terms, but merely uses them the way other specifications do. That said, the XML spec refers to documents and processors because the spec defines conformance requirements both for documents and processors. Copying the definition into a spec which does not define a class of documents may not have been the best way to start. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2015 23:59:06 UTC