[Standards] [XEP-0375] Unclear Wording (Was: MIX should not be in 2016 compliance list)

Georg Lukas georg at op-co.de
Tue Aug 16 17:18:44 UTC 2016


* Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> [2016-08-13 19:56]:
> At least for this particular example there is a footnote for this: "§
> 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:

"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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20160816/67b87098/attachment.sig>


More information about the Standards mailing list