W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2011

Re: ISSUE-140 CPP — no conformance versions

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 19:27:01 +0100
Message-ID: <4D4EE7F5.20706@gmx.de>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 06.02.2011 18:43, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de>  wrote:
>> It's essential, when in the real world you need to communicate with another
>> party about that kind of HTML you're using. For instance, try to write a SoW
>> for a project and say "whatever works in the latest version of browsers".
>
> Specifying "whatever works in the latest version of browsers" or
> "HTML5" are not the only options, and neither is especially valuable
> in a statement of work.
>
> Useful information is more detailed and takes forms such as:
>
>      1) Use markup patterns described in documents L, M, N.
>      2) Validate using tool X using options Q and R. Ignore errors A, B, C.
>      3) Lint using tool Y. Ignore warnings G, H, I.
>      4) Test end result in user agents T, R, V.

Yes.

But the HTML5 spec defines many patterns, some valid, some not. It 
allows certain extension points. It's useful to have a name for that it 
describes, and what modifications/extension are allowed, and how they 
should be labeled when discussing conformance.

I think that's that Noah's change proposal is about.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2011 18:27:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:22 UTC