Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 12, 2010, 4:11:48 AM (9 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

Make requirements sections consistent again.

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis/10/p6-cache.xml

    r845 r847  
    340340<section anchor="intro.requirements" title="Requirements">
    341341<t>
    342   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD
    343   NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as
    344   described in <xref target="RFC2119" />.
    345 </t>
    346 <t>
    347   An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more of the &MUST;
    348   or &REQUIRED; level requirements for the protocols it implements. An implementation
    349   that satisfies all the &MUST; or &REQUIRED; level and all the &SHOULD; level
    350   requirements for its protocols is said to be "unconditionally compliant"; one that
    351   satisfies all the &MUST; level requirements but not all the &SHOULD; level
    352   requirements for its protocols is said to be "conditionally compliant."
     342   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
     343   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
     344   document are to be interpreted as described in <xref target="RFC2119"/>.
     345</t>
     346<t>
     347   An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more
     348   of the "MUST" or "REQUIRED" level requirements for the protocols it
     349   implements. An implementation that satisfies all the "MUST" or "REQUIRED"
     350   level and all the "SHOULD" level requirements for its protocols is said
     351   to be "unconditionally compliant"; one that satisfies all the "MUST"
     352   level requirements but not all the "SHOULD" level requirements for its
     353   protocols is said to be "conditionally compliant".
    353354</t>
    354355</section>
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.