W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > December 2007

Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 07:28:49 -0500
Message-Id: <CD265A18-2DCA-4F7D-A348-342165EE9A9D@nokia.com>
Cc: public-appformats@w3.org
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Stuart Williams <skw@hp.com>


On Dec 12, 2007, at 11:38 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:

>>> I think there are some problems with introducing the same
>>> algorithm non-normatively in a contrain-based style:
>>>   1. There might be differences
>>>   2. It might confuse implementors
>> What I offered doesn't present an algorithm, it was an attempt to  
>> say, explicitly, what the algorithm is intended to accomplish  
>> ('what' rather than 'how').
>> The algorithm "does what it does" is hardly a good basis on which  
>> to review the spec.
> I think we disagree on that.

I see some value in including descriptive text regarding the  
algorithms such as the "intentional" text Stuart supplied in [1].

Anne - in [2], (your response to [1]) it appears you agree with  
Stuart's interpretation of the algorithm, based on the "yes"  
responses to his points. Perhaps some text like Stuart proposed could  
precede the algorithms, provided Stuart is willing to author the text  
and of course the text must not contradict the algorithms.

Implementors and "potential implementors" of this spec - please send  
your comments on this issue (e.g. would "intentional" text on the  
algorithms add "confusion" or provide useful info).

BTW, a related issue was raised in July [3] and it remains Open.

Regards, Art Barstow

[1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Dec/ 
[2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Dec/ 
[3] <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/waf/issues/11>
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2007 12:29:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:50:08 UTC