Review number of MAY's in spec

[neilsjefferies]

Review all the MAY declarations in the specification to establish whether it might be tightened up (convert to MUSTs) for V2.0

[rosy1280]

we should create a list of the mays and review them one by one. this is something that we should do before we make any changes to the spec because it might identify something that we need to discuss for V2.

[zimeon]

There are 14 instances of MAY in the current draft spec:
> cat index.md | perl -ne 'if (m/^#/) {$h=$_} elsif (m/<span class=\"rfc2119\">MAY/ && !m/key words/) { $n++; print $n . ". " . $h; print " " . $_ }'

1. 3.3 Version Directories

   For compatibility with existing filesystem conventions, implementations MAY use zero-padded

2. 3.3.1 Content Directory

   otherwise. The name of this designated sub-directory MAY be defined in the [inventory

3. 3.4 Digests

   An OCFL Inventory MAY contain a fixity section that can store one or more blocks containing

4. 3.5.1 Basic Structure

   resolvable. For example, URNs [RFC8141] MAY be used.

5. 3.5.1 Basic Structure

   There MAY be the following key:

6. 3.5.4 Fixity

   An OCFL Object inventory MAY include a block for storing additional fixity information to

7. 3.5.4 Fixity

   MAY include digest values for any subset of content paths in the object. Where included,

8. 3.8 Logs Directory

   The base directory of an OCFL Object MAY contain a directory named logs, which <span

9. 3.8 Logs Directory

   Clients operating on the object MAY log actions here that are not otherwise captured.

10. 3.9 Object Extensions

    The base directory of an OCFL Object MAY contain a directory named extensions for the

11. 4.1 Root Structure

    An OCFL Storage Root MAY contain other files as direct children. These might include a

12. 4.1 Root Structure

    An OCFL Storage Root MAY contain a file named ocfl_layout.json to describe the

13. 4.4 Storage Root Extensions

    The base directory of an OCFL Storage Root MAY contain a directory named extensions for

14. 4.5 Documenting Local Extensions

    repository](https://ocfl.github.io/extensions/). However, local extensions MAY be

[srerickson]

Does it make sense to include the SHOULDs in this analysis? (You should do SHOULDs?) Replacing SHOULDs with MUSTs would also tighten up the spec. Fortunately, they are already enumerated as warnings.

[rosy1280]

@zimeon did you create a list of MAYs? also a list of SHOULDs might help us answer Seth's question above.