Is your task related to a problem? Please describe.
In its current form, e.g. the https://docs.bosch-semantic-stack.com/introduction.html (incl. BAMM spec) is not always as precise as it should be when referring to mandatory/optional concepts. For example, the model guidelines and naming conventions are not always making it clear which requirements are mandatory and which are advises.
Is your task related to a problem? Please describe. In its current form, e.g. the https://docs.bosch-semantic-stack.com/introduction.html (incl. BAMM spec) is not always as precise as it should be when referring to mandatory/optional concepts. For example, the model guidelines and naming conventions are not always making it clear which requirements are mandatory and which are advises.
Describe the solution you'd like Terms "must", "must not", "should" and "should not" are used consistently throughout the entire documentation. https://docs.bosch-semantic-stack.com/introduction.html and https://eclipse-esmf.github.io/esmf-documentation/index.html are reviewed for consistent usage. (Remark: Only specification parts (e.g. SAMM) have to follow this pattern very rigidly)