Opening a can of worms
K. Berry
TWG-TDS@SHSU.edu
Thu, 9 Nov 1995 18:06:31 -0500
PS: Shouldn't it read `must not' instead of `may not' in the first
two items in section 2.2.2?
The two items in question are:
{\abbr{ISO}-9660} imposes the following limitations:
\item File and directory names, not including any directory path or
extension part, may not exceed eight characters.
\item Filenames may have a single extension. Extensions may not exceed
three characters. Directory names may not have an extension.
In this case, I find `may not' preferable to `must not' or `shall not'
for some reason. I know it's ambiguous, though. I'll change it if others
prefer, I don't feel that strongly.