W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xformsusers@w3.org > March 2018

Re: "Author-optional"

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 13:27:28 +0200
To: " XForms" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.zgk3f2fpsmjzpq@steven-xps>
I have now replaced all "author-optional"s by "optional", and in the small  
number of places where optional meant "implementation-optional", I have so  
marked it.

Steven

On Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:40:54 +0200, Steven Pemberton  
<steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:

> 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 Wednesday, 28 March 2018 11:27:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:37:49 UTC