Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ReadMe] Add Compliance Language #381

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SH

The keywords "unspecified", "undefined", and "implementation-defined" are to be interpreted as described in the [rationale for the C99 standard][c99-unspecified].

An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more of the MUST, REQUIRED, or SHALL requirements.
An implementation is compliant if it satisfies all the MUST, REQUIRED, and SHALL requirements.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we want to follow runtime-spec more closely and:

  • Use the “for the protocols it implements” language.
  • Explicitly list protocols defined by this specification (the “Understanding the Specification” section below is close to this already, since defining protocols for compliance is very closely related to the current base/optional layer wording that section is currently using).


![](img/build-diagram.png)

Once built the OCI Image can then be discovered by name, downloaded, verified by hash, trusted through a signature, and unpacked into an [OCI Runtime Bundle](https://github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/blob/master/bundle.md).
Expand Down