[Standards] [XEP-0375] Unclear Wording (Was: MIX should not be in 2016 compliance list)
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
"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."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Standards