Re: WGLC: SHOULD and conformance

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Tue, 30 April 2013 04:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A9FD21F9C04 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2BdTLvJoHyLx for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BAF021F9B5D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UX1sD-0006EI-EO for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:09:01 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:09:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UX1sD-0006EI-EO@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UX1s3-0006Bm-IM for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:08:51 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.219.51]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UX1s2-0006KJ-QS for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:08:51 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id k14so89724oag.10 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=aaLhR/WLnhEgFtLV+ZqjK6LygLo2ApohXQvuQaTKtWY=; b=RDy0+65/ImopSYoNtwHjaNlJG32VuuA6eLfVyPCJYASCsX9ae0kGhFXt7RxaIMSL6R 2/z2sLaKwaP8jcfBxh6JjPVfJqNn6YXE1WHnbJXmODUT1ZS/c55urPgrKeKDX3giJLOQ FvupVJhdi79PJuCc9p+qS1AXSYNpPFSbGw2lF4LVRfoYcHeWO/wuPoEU2Q50ufOuWOWj Wcew08N8CsWCW1QdFQUoJvTr21DmHWN9il+zAtygTmc+4dSNI3HOKErkKXP3RCowaiNP YmhFwz5n3m+4zeHD+ZPIXiU8q9nzGaxCZS+Hd9vakvkZxNaCt0c2ElvCkXv1FiqXF9Ed gB5g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.60.1 with SMTP id d1mr2164073obr.33.1367294904961; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E83CA981-44A6-46CC-A026-A64A4B87214E@mnot.net>
References: <E83CA981-44A6-46CC-A026-A64A4B87214E@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:08:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbfFGW868RGvkkRgzLsDZmBAmkGK2fOTEggKeDtWE0qzGw@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158aaa81d11ae04db8c272e
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.51; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f51.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.725, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UX1s2-0006KJ-QS 950b5a60e812feb2a26ac9b7bd6eea1a
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WGLC: SHOULD and conformance
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbfFGW868RGvkkRgzLsDZmBAmkGK2fOTEggKeDtWE0qzGw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17711
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

+1.. That's a lot closer to reality anyway.
On Apr 29, 2013 7:27 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>; wrote:

> Up until now, we've had this to say about the status of SHOULDs regarding
> conformance (p1, "Conformance and Error Handling):
>
> > An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of
> the requirements associated with the roles it partakes in HTTP. Note that
> SHOULD-level requirements are relevant here, unless one of the documented
> exceptions is applicable.
>
> After reviewing the specs (and taking in account the misused SHOULDs and
> those I think should be stronger, see previous messages), I believe that
> ALL of the remaining SHOULDs in the set are NOT relevant to conformance,
> but instead  represent implementation guidance.
>
> So, I propose we change the text above in p1 to:
>
> """
> An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of the
> MUST-level requirements associated with the roles it partakes in HTTP. Note
> that SHOULD-level requirements are relevant to conformance, but do not
> formally impact it; instead, they represent implementation guidance.
> """
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
>