- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:40:54 +0200
- To: " XForms" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
We say in section 1.3 "Documentation Conventions" https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XForms_2.0#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 2119]." 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? Steven
Received on Thursday, 6 July 2017 12:41:30 UTC