This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 23894 - MUSTs and MAYs in a Note in 3.3 Extension Attributes
Summary: MUSTs and MAYs in a Note in 3.3 Extension Attributes
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XSLT 3.0 (show other bugs)
Version: Working drafts
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 trivial
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michael Kay
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-11-22 23:51 UTC by Abel Braaksma
Modified: 2014-05-15 14:00 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Abel Braaksma 2013-11-22 23:51:25 UTC 
Editorial.

Not sure this falls under the editor's discretion, or whether it is an actual (layout) error in the spec: the second and third paragraph under the first Note under 3.3. Extension Attributes contains several mandatory MUSTs, MAYs, MUST NOTs and a REQUIRED. 

Since a Note is considered non-normative, and capital MUST/MAY etc are considered normative, this seems to be contradictory. Perhaps only the first paragraph was originally meant as Note?

This layout is the same in XSLT 2.0.
Comment 1 Michael Kay 2013-11-23 10:08:36 UTC 
Thanks.

The query //note[.//rfc2119] picks up a number of further instances of this inconsistency, which I will fix.
Comment 2 Michael Kay 2013-11-28 18:22:58 UTC 
I have removed all RFC markup from notes.

Most of it was doing no harm: it was either "mays" and "shoulds" which don't really have any normative force anyway, or "musts" that explained the consequences of "musts" already stated normatively. But removing the markup avoids any arguments.