[sc34wg3] TMCL - Inconsistent examples

[Patrick Durusau]

Greetings!

Not sure if I should enter a bug report of just note this issue here.

6.2 - 6.6

"Declaring *** a **** type"

6.7

"The following declares..."

7.2 - 7.17

"The following states..."

First, the variation is unacceptable.

Second, Annex H provides:

> To express a direct instruction, for example referring to steps to be 
> taken in a test
> method, use the imperative mood in English.
> EXAMPLE “Switch on the recorder.”

So, the example in 7.2 becomes:

Constrain creature to be an abstract topic type:

(text of example)

7.3

Constrain topics of type person to have zero or one subject identifier:

The use of "shall" in the example is inappropriate. It isn't normative 
language. Contrast with the immediately preceding (correct) use of 
"shall" for card-min. That is normative language.

I can re-cast the introductions to the other examples if that would be 
helpful.

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!

Patrick

-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick at durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)