Levi Stephen wrote:
>Sorry, should have said worded, rather than defined. It's good that they
>are equivalent ;)
OK. I agree with you that the latter is a superior wording, because it's
more general when considering non-rule entities: I think a contract,
for example, should be able to use the MMI terminology, without making
claims about rule breaches. (A contract breach is actually a rule breach,
but that's due to R1742, not inherent in the concept of a contract.)
>I think I am agreeing. The definition of MAY is probably best as
>"Performing the described action is permitted"
Yes, good. My "clarify MMI" proposal had:
* <x> MAY <y>: it is PERMITTED for <x> to <y>.
* PERMITTED, LEGAL: it is not MANDATORY to not perform the
action.
* MANDATORY, REQUIRED: there is an obligation to perform the
action.
-zefram
