Jacques: I made the changes you suggested. See attached document. All the best, Ashok On 5/19/2014 7:15 PM, Jacques Durand wrote: Ashok: Looks good. Two suggestions: 1. When looking at the "good" clause example in section 4, wondering if we should not recast it as a (good) case of two levels of conformance, one including the other: Level 1. "non-validating processor" (includes all 6 rules + well-formedness) Level 2. " validating processor" defined as including Level 1 (reqs for non-validating processor) + fulfillment of DTD constraints. Because it looks strange that "validating processor" does not explicitly state the well-formedness req. 2. Suggest to reword the comment for the point: " • The specification says: "Servers SHOULD include the available bindings supported in the xyz Object. " Then the conformance clause says: "The xyz Object MUST provide a list of the bindings supported." Replace: "Although technically it is permissible for a conformance clause to strengthen a normative statement from the specification body, it is preferable that the mandatory requirement is included in the specification and the conformance clause refers to it." with: "When a normative statement from the specification body is strengthened in the conformance clause - e.g. from SHOULD to MUST, or MAY to SHOULD - the Conformance clause must still refer to the original statement and make explicit mention of its strengthening. Also, in case there is no other conformance clause that makes use of the original statement as is, then it is preferable that the strengthened requirement is directly stated in the specification and the conformance clause just refers to it." I did not do anything about the two above suggestions in the attached draft (rev8) but just did a few other minor tweaks on rev7 (e.g. rule 10), so please use the attached if you plan to do more (or else I can try to implement the two comments if you agree). Thanks, -jacques -----Original Message----- From:
tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
tab@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Ashok Malhotra Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:05 PM To:
tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [tab] Conformance Clause Annex I did some work on this over the last few days. Please take a look and comment. Attachment: TAB-ConformanceGuide-annex-rev9.doc Description: MS-Word document