Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Michael Kay wrote: > I don't know offhand what RFC 2119 says on the matter, and I > haven't got time to look, but any set of rules that includes > the term "may not" is liable to be misinterpreted by half > its audience. When I am reviewing specifications, "may not" > always gets a thumbs down. *sigh* I do wish people wouldn't review things without reading them. I happen to agree with you about MAY NOT, but that's what RFC 2119 says. The RFC is about 600 words long, BTW, and here's a link: http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2119.txt . > I don't much like "may" either. Everything is permitted > unless the specification prohibits it, a sentence whose main > verb is "may" therefore says nothing. *Everything*? So if a specification for a C compiler doesn't *say* that compiling a strictly conforming program does *not* make demons fly out of your nose, then the compiler is allowed to do that? -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@c... You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5) xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
