[MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] FW: [EXTERNAL] RE: "Shall", "Must", "Should", "May" Quandary With Respect to Informative Annexes

[Berry, David S (US 3920)]

To All (especially Lead Editors):

This is a bit of an esoteric topic, but I think it's worth a quick read. Start with my message at the bottom.

David


From: Thomas Gannett <thomas.gannett at tgannett.net>
Date: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 7:56 AM
To: David Berry <david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: "Shall", "Must", "Should", "May" Quandary With Respect to Informative Annexes

David:

The disclaimer note in section 1 (“these conventions do not imply constraints. . . .”) indeed makes it not really necessary to worry about diction in something clearly identified as being informative. Generally try to update such terminology anyway if the opportunity presents itself, but I don’t worry too much about it.

Tom


Logothete, L.L.C.
thomas.gannett at tgannett.net
+1 443 472 0805

From: Berry, David S (US 3920) [mailto:david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 5:56 PM
To: CCSDS Secretariat
Subject: "Shall", "Must", "Should", "May" Quandary With Respect to Informative Annexes

Tom:

I'm working on an internal WG proofreading review of the Orbit Data Messages which is in revision and nearly ready to be sent to you for preparation for Agency Review.

I came across something that has clearly escaped my attention, and I need your expert opinion.

The ODM annex titled "SECURITY, SANA, AND PATENT CONSIDERATIONS" (primarily the SECURITY section) has a large number of instances of "should", a "shall", and a few instances of "may", but it is an informative annex.

I started to contort the English language to offer the ODM Lead Editor non-normative substitutes for these violations, but then thought I should check the TDM V.2, recently published, to see what it had. To my chagrin, it has nearly the same text in the SECURITY section as does the new ODM. I recalled that in the days when the TDM V.1 was being developed, the SECURITY section was a fairly new requirement, and it appeared in the TDM as a normative section (Section 5, not an Annex). Later the SECURITY sections were supposed to be placed in an informative annex and combined with SANA Considerations and Patent information. When the TDM V.1 section 5 was moved to an informative annex as I prepared TDM V.2, all the "should"/"shall"/"may" language went with it. And I managed to overlook it (even though I read through the entire document several times)!


I recalled that the CCSDS Publications Guide has a NOTE in section 1.6.2.1 stating that "NOTE – These conventions do not imply constraints on diction in text that is clearly informative in nature." Can this be construed to mean that Annexes clearly labelled "Informative" can use the words "shall", "must", "should", "may" as applicable? The language will be less contorted and thus easier to understand if that's the case.



Thanks for your guidance!

David




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-nav-exec/attachments/20210423/0b20f43e/attachment.htm>