Re: keep conformance objective (detailed review of section 1. Introduction)

Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>: hodd gsachd:

> Agreed, but would you not agree with James that
> "valid" and "conforming" are easy to comprehend,
> and arguable more so than several variants of
> "conforming" ?

I'd say “technically conforming” and “semantically conforming” are  
much easier to understand for non-english native speakers like me.

j.j.