| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
| --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
> there are no synonyms for “should”. "ought to"? English has a rich set of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_modal_verbs , so we had better find one! Mark -- Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW: http://www.samsung.com/uk From: ***** IEEE stds-802-11-tgm List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stephens, Adrian P --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- Hello Ed, I hear what you’re saying. I’m separately asking the IEEE-SA editors to clarify this in the style guide. We may discover that there is a different position once the issue has been considered by the group of folks who review this document. Thinking aloud here, does “should” encompass “may” or not? If “should” gives a recommendation to do something that is already permitted. (A STA may do x. If y happens, the STA should do x.), then you could argue that you already have to encompass in your testing a STA doing x and not doing x. But if (A STA should do x) is the only mention of the ability of a STA to do x, you could argue that this is a “superset of may”, and has a test case caused by the “should”. In this sense we might distinguish normative and informative “shoulds”. If folks agree with this logic, then we really need two verbs to distinguish them. synonym.com claims there are no synonyms for “should”. Best Regards, Adrian P STEPHENS Tel: +44 (1793) 404825 (office) Tel: +1 (408) 2397485 (mobile, USA) ---------------------------------------------- From: ***** IEEE stds-802-11-tgm List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Edward Reuss --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- Further to Mr. Hunter's point, > the IEEE Style Manual (2012) rule is "Interspersed normative and informative text is not allowed." This requirement does not use conformance language "shall", "shall not", "should", "should not", "may", "may not", "must", or "must not". Instead, it uses "is not". This means that technically, as per the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, "Rules for the structure and drafting of International Standards", this clause in the IEEE Style Manual is informative, and therefore not a normative requirement for an IEEE international standards document. ;-) Seriously though, we have to be very careful with this because someone has to turn the output of our work into a validation test procedure, whether in the Wi-Fi Alliance or internally within a vendor company. The distinction of normative text versus informative text is critical to this purpose. If an informative annex needs to make a recommendation, then it's not really informative. An implementor can ignore all informative parts of the standard and still implement a solution that normatively complies to the standard. If the authors wish to encourage a particular method for implementing a feature, for interoperability or performance reasons, then that needs to be stated normatively. In practical terms, this means the entire annex probably needs to be made normative, or at least broken into sub-parts most of which can be informative, but those parts that specify the recommended procedure be marked as normative. (More work for the editors, to which I apologize, but the Wi-Fi Alliance will thank you in the end). I hope I don't sound like I'm trying to "teach my own grandmother how to suck an egg", but I see too many drafts come to letter ballot that do not observe these requirements. I try to comment on them, but there are often too many to cite in letter ballot comments within the allocated time. -- Ed Reuss On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:18 AM, hunter <hunter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_______________________________________________________________________________ IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand. SELF SERVICE OPTION: Point your Browser to - http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM and then amend your subscription on the form provided. If you require removal from the reflector press the LEAVE button. Further information can be found at: http://www.ieee802.org/11/Email_Subscribe.html _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand. SELF SERVICE OPTION: Point your Browser to - http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM and then amend your subscription on the form provided. If you require removal from the reflector press the LEAVE button. Further information can be found at: http://www.ieee802.org/11/Email_Subscribe.html _______________________________________________________________________________ IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand. SELF SERVICE OPTION: Point your Browser to - http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM and then amend your subscription on the form provided. If you require removal from the reflector press the LEAVE button. Further information can be found at: http://www.ieee802.org/11/Email_Subscribe.html _______________________________________________________________________________ |