We say in section 1.3 "Documentation Conventions"

     "With regard to implementing behaviors defined for XForms, this  
document uses the terms must, must not,   required, shall, shall not,  
recommended, should, should not, may, and optional in accord with [RFC  

and as a result introduce the ugly term "author-optional", which is used  
all over the place.

Well, I just checked all uses of "optional", and I don't really find an  
occurrence of the word that relies on RFC 2119.

I really don't like "author-optional", and would very much prefer to go  
back to "optional", and never use the RFC 2119 meaning of the word.

Any objections?


Received on Thursday, 6 July 2017 12:41:30 UTC