3 ms·
The spec only says "should", not "must". Apparently these wingnuts thought that means the spec can be ignored.
by nikanj 7y ago
The spec only says "should", not "must". Apparently these wingnuts thought that means the spec can be ignored.
- reificator 7y ago> The spec only says "should", not "must". Apparently these wingnuts thought that means the spec can be ignored. Not arguing in favor of this particular choice, but yes. That is exactly what "should" means in most cases. For instance, in RFC 2119: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119 > SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean 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.
- azernik 7y agoBlanket disregard of a SHOULD directive as a UX decision neither falls under "in particular circumstances" nor indicates that they've "understood and carefully weighed" the consequences.
- ko27 7y agoThere are no semantics to discuss. Chrome is spec compliant. That's a fact. Words like "should" and "must" have well defined meaning that is clarified in every spec document, which I would highly advise you to read before writing any further comments and insults.
- Natanael_L 7y agoSHOULD does not equal MAY
- gtfratteus 7y agoNobody said it does.