(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4775) Preliminary result of vote on N1929

[Malcolm Cohen]

Dan Nagle wrote:
>I hope everyone realizes that there is no normative text anywhere in 24772.

Right, and this means that, especially in an informative annex, there is not 
permitted to be any requirement.

>I certainly don't object to changes, but let's not do so under a 
>mis-impression.

Indeed, and I already noted the absence of "shall" and agreed that this was 
good.  However, the language use does need to be reviewed, and "must" although 
not necessarily technically wrong is often an indicator of poor wording or a 
hidden requirement.  Rewording as a simple statement of fact is probably easy 
and almost certainly an improvement in most cases.

In my copious spare time I should remove the few remaining uses of "must" in the 
main standard as I have already received complaints that they are confusing if 
not outright wrong!  (I don't think they are wrong, but it is hard to argue 
against confusing to someone who was confused by them.)

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.