When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word shall is the equivalent to a mandatory requirement. Some quality standards like ISO 26262 and RFC 2119 give clear definitions for this word and other words like should and may (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt).
--> ISO 26262 is not a quality standard but a functional safety standard.
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word should is the equivalent to a recommended action.
--> "recommended action" to be changed to "recommended requirement"
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word requirement means a requirement listed in the table of requirements or a requirement sub-part is compulsory, a necessary condition, behavior or action that must be implemented or carried out.
--> "a requirement sub-part is compulsory" to be changed to "a requirement sub-part that is compulsory"
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word guideline means a guideline listed in the table of guidelines or a guideline sub-part is a principle, piece of advice, instruction that by the discretion of the reader may or may not be implemented or carry out.
--> "a guideline sub-part is a principle" to be changed to "a guideline sub-part that is a principle"
--> "carry out" to be changed to "carried out"
When used alone, this word, or the term required, means that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification. When followed by not (“must not” ), the phrase means that the definition is an absolute prohibition of the specification.
--> "or the term required" to be changed to "or the term 'required'"
When used alone, this word, or the adjective recommended, means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. When followed by not (“should not”), the phrase means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before implementing any behavior described with this label.
--> IMHO, the explanation for should matches explanation for should not and vice a versa and hence it need to be swapped especially the below parts of the statements:
to ignore a particular item
when the particular behavior is acceptable or even useful
--> "the adjective recommended" to "the objective 'recommended'"
irudkin
commented
5 years ago
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word shall is the equivalent to a mandatory requirement. Some quality standards like ISO 26262 and RFC 2119 give clear definitions for this word and other words like should and may (https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt).
--> ISO 26262 is not a quality standard but a functional safety standard.
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word should is the equivalent to a recommended action.
--> "recommended action" to be changed to "recommended requirement"
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word requirement means a requirement listed in the table of requirements or a requirement sub-part is compulsory, a necessary condition, behavior or action that must be implemented or carried out.
--> "a requirement sub-part is compulsory" to be changed to "a requirement sub-part that is compulsory"
When used with reference in the context of the Khronos SC Requirements Document the word guideline means a guideline listed in the table of guidelines or a guideline sub-part is a principle, piece of advice, instruction that by the discretion of the reader may or may not be implemented or carry out.
--> "a guideline sub-part is a principle" to be changed to "a guideline sub-part that is a principle" --> "carry out" to be changed to "carried out"
When used alone, this word, or the term required, means that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification. When followed by not (“must not” ), the phrase means that the definition is an absolute prohibition of the specification. --> "or the term required" to be changed to "or the term 'required'"
When used alone, this word, or the adjective recommended, means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. When followed by not (“should not”), the phrase means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before implementing any behavior described with this label.
--> IMHO, the explanation for should matches explanation for should not and vice a versa and hence it need to be swapped especially the below parts of the statements:
--> "the adjective recommended" to "the objective 'recommended'"