- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:57:47 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29498 Bug ID: 29498 Summary: [FO31] Some normative RFC 2119 MAY/SHOULD etc appear in non-normative Notes, RFC itself is not mentioned in conformance section Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Candidate Recommendation Hardware: PC OS: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XPath 3.1 Assignee: jonathan.robie@gmail.com Reporter: abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org Target Milestone: --- I'm confused about a few occasions where the RFC xxx of MAY, RECOMMEND, SHOULD etc appear in explanatory Notes. The intent may have been that the verbs should be taken as written in the RFC, but this conflicts with the Notes themselves being non-normative. I'm not sure whether this is a big problem or not, but if possible, the Note should probably have the non-capitalized versions of these verbs and/or the Note, if meant to be normative, should not be a Note to begin with? I found the following 8 items using the following query on the XHTML source, which may or may not be an exhaustive list: //*:span[@class="verb"][ancestor::*:div[@class/contains(., "note")]] 1) 4.1 Numeric Types: "when casting from string to double the lexical form -0 *MAY* be converted to positive zero" 2) 4.1 Numeric Types: "though negative zero is RECOMMENDED." 3) 9.8.4.4 The language, calendar, and place arguments: "This is the convention that *SHOULD* be used when the requested calendar is OS" 4) 9.8.4.4 The language, calendar, and place arguments: "the conventions of ISO 8601 *SHOULD* be followed" 5) 19.1.2.1 Casting to xs:float: "Implementations *SHOULD* return negative zero" 6) 19.1.2.1 Casting to xs:float: "implementations *MAY* return positive zero in this case." 7) 19.1.2.2 Casting to xs:double: "Implementations *SHOULD* return negative zero for xs:double" 8) 19.1.2.2 Casting to xs:double: "implementations *MAY* return positive zero in this case." Similar situations may have appeared in the XP31 text, but it uses different styles and tags for each normative MUST/SHOULD etc, as such it is much harder to query the XHTML. I tried the following to get the elements containing these texts and it returns 13 items, which I haven't checked by hand yet: //(*) [not(*)] [upper-case(.) = ("MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY")] ---------------- Interestingly, XP31 references RFC 2119, XSLT references RFC 2119, as does XQuery, but FO31 does not mention it. I would assume that it "inherits" its reference from XP31, but perhaps repeating it in the Conformance section may be a good thing, esp. since there are about 219 official, tagged occurrences of these keywords. Furthermore, the Conformance section in XP31 links to RFC 2119, and mentions "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD" and "MAY", but not "RECOMMENDED", "(NOT) REQUIRED", which are used in the normative prose. I think that is an omission? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 22 February 2016 00:57:52 UTC