In addition to using the dictionary, it's worth looking up how W3C uses the
terms in relationship with the specs. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
While MUST and MUST NOT would be more handy, reality is grey sometimes and
does depend on the interpretation of the author. The biggest problem however
is that most authors never read the specs.
----- Original Message -----
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Fieldsets outside of forms. Was: Safari 3.1 and
webkit-border-radius
Perhaps it will help the web standards if W3C to be more authoritative
and dictatorial?
"MUST NOT", "MUST", "ABSOLUTELY NOT", "ILLEGAL TO USE", "NOT ALLOWED"
to replace these ambiguous "MAY NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT".
This way, it makes no wrong suggestion to people who are not English
tongue and who needs to depend on English dictionary to understand the
spec - I am speaking of me :-)
tee
Keryx's point of view seems to be dominant, I fear. Even the teacher
at my web design class seems to think that using EMs to style citations
is valid. Yet she generally encourages web standards... :(
Cordially,
David
--
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
