Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ReadMe] Just one level/tier of compliance (rebase) #553

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 6, 2016
Merged

[ReadMe] Just one level/tier of compliance (rebase) #553

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 2 additions & 3 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -24,9 +24,8 @@ Table of Contents

In the specifications in the above table of contents, the keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119](http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119) (Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997).

An implementation is not compliant for a given CPU architecture if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST or REQUIRED requirements for the protocols it implements.
An implementation is compliant for a given CPU architecture if it satisfies all the MUST and REQUIRED requirements for the protocols it implements.
An implementation that satisfies all the MUST or REQUIRED and all the SHOULD requirements for its protocols on a given CPU architecture is said to be "unconditionally compliant" with those protocols and architectures.
An implementation is not compliant for a given CPU architecture if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST, REQUIRED, or SHALL requirements for the protocols it implements.
An implementation is compliant for a given CPU architecture if it satisfies all the MUST, REQUIRED, and SHALL requirements for the protocols it implements.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why are we saying the same thing twice, just backwards?
Also, why do we need to say "CPU architecture"? Why not just "An implementation is compliant if it ...." ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 10:59:01AM -0700, Doug Davis wrote:

-An implementation is not compliant for a given CPU architecture if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST or REQUIRED requirements for the protocols it implements.
-An implementation is compliant for a given CPU architecture if it satisfies all the MUST and REQUIRED requirements for the protocols it implements.
-An implementation that satisfies all the MUST or REQUIRED and all the SHOULD requirements for its protocols on a given CPU architecture is said to be "unconditionally compliant" with those protocols and architectures.
+An implementation is not compliant for a given CPU architecture if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST, REQUIRED, or SHALL requirements for the protocols it implements.
+An implementation is compliant for a given CPU architecture if it satisfies all the MUST, REQUIRED, and SHALL requirements for the protocols it implements.

why are we saying the same thing twice, just backwards?

We could say:

An implementation is compliant for a given CPU architecture if and only if …

to reduce duplication, but without the “and only if” we need to say it
both ways.

Also, why do we need to say "CPU architecture"? Why not just "An
implementation is compliant if it ...." ?

Compliance is granted for a given architecture (more on this in #527).


Protocols defined by this specification are:
* Linux containers: [runtime.md](runtime.md), [config.md](config.md), [config-linux.md](config-linux.md), and [runtime-linux.md](runtime-linux.md).
Expand Down