On 16 August 2016 at 18:18, Georg Lukas <[email protected]> wrote: > * Sam Whited <[email protected]> [2016-08-13 19:56]: >> At least for this particular example there is a footnote for this: "ยง >> Only one of the recommended providers must be implemented for >> compliance. " > > Oops, I totally missed that one :> > >> > I'd like to see an improved vocabulary in the XEP - what are "items", >> > "line items", "providers" and "features" - do we really need these >> > terms? >> Do you have suggestions for alternative terms? > > I think that "feature" and "[feature] provider" are the two most > meaningful ones of the set. If we replace all occurrences of *item with > either of the above, that should improve the readability already. Then > replace the last sentence of the intro with the following, and we are > set: >
This is a bit of a bikeshed, I know, but "feature" to me means XEP-0030. Maybe "capability"? > "Support for the listed features is REQUIRED for compliance purposes. A > feature is considered supported if all providers listed in the feature's > table row are implemented. Exceptions to this rule are marked explicitly." > > > Georg > > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list > Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
