- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:40:57 -0800
On Tuesday 2007-12-11 17:51 -0600, David Hyatt wrote: > SHOULD is toothless. It carries absolutely no weight. I don't think it's > appropriate for such weak language to be in the HTML5 spec. It should > either be a MUST (which is inappropriate at this juncture for reasons that > Dave Singer. Ian Hickson and myself have posted about in previous messages) > or just not be mentioned at all. I disagree that SHOULD is toothless. A SHOULD is something that you should do unless you have a good reason not to: # 3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there # may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a # particular item, but the full implications must be understood and # carefully weighed before choosing a different course. -- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt In this case, most implementors following the SHOULD and implementing Theora might help companies whose concern is submarine patents become more comfortable about shipping Theora, especially if some of the implementors are companies similar in size or wealth to those non-implementors. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 22:40:57 UTC