Semi-related to this, has a unified way of writing rules been proposed? A sort of standard? We're pretty much all definitions (like X is ABC) rights (you can do X) and conditional triggers (if X happens, then Y).
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > I think a MAY is only ever truly useful as an exception, if there's a > default > "CAN but SHALL NOT/MAY NOT" in place somewhere else. > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Ah, I see. I don't see how useful a solitary MAY is then aside from > being a stealth "CANNOT" in a way. > > > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > > If it's SHALL and MAY, without providing a method for doing it, > if it's an > > > unregulated action that's OK imo > > > > By R2125 clause(1), putting in a SHALL or MAY automatically makes > it regulated > > > > (er, "restricted", was the title of the rule changed by the > regulated -> restricted > > switchover). > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
