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

Re: Normative status of author-only view of the HTML5 specification

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 08:35:53 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTik+4h3Umw9mPJqmtKxr78Pf1SLDHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Hi Jonas,

>So we should state that if anything is left undefined in the authors
>document, but the HTML5 spec defines normative requirements, then the
>HTML5 specs normative requirements are the ones that apply.


What is to be done about differences in normative requirements between HTML5
and the HTML living standard?

which one is authoritative in case of conflict?

It appears farcical to be arguing over the normative status of a document
that is meant to be a strict subset of another, when we have multiple
*intentionally conflicting* documents claiming to authoritatively define
HTML for implementers AND authors.


regards
stevef


On 10 June 2011 21:53, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 1:50 AM, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com> wrote:
> > On 06/10/2011 02:35 AM, T.V Raman wrote:
> >>
> >> Paul, you are correct. If the two documents disagree after the
> >> one is a projection of the other, then an cinsistency points to a
> >> much deper problem.
> >
> > It seems much more likely to point to a minor error in the redaction
> process
> > e.g. some content accidentally being excluded from the author-only view,
> or
> > a bug in the scripts. In such cases one would always expect the main spec
> to
> > be right and never the author-only view. Hence the main spec should be
> > normative, the author only view should not, but should include text like
> > Henri suggested indicating that it is a reduction of the normative spec
> and
> > discrepancies should be reported as bugs.
>
> Another thing that absolutely will happen, and which should also be
> clarified, is what happens when one of the two documents leaves
> something undefined, but the other document does define behavior. It
> will most likely be very common for the authors document to leave out
> details, or simply state that something is not allowed, but have the
> HTML5 spec define very strict required behavior which affects both
> authors and implementations.
>
> So we should state that if anything is left undefined in the authors
> document, but the HTML5 spec defines normative requirements, then the
> HTML5 specs normative requirements are the ones that apply.
>
> / Jonas
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Saturday, 11 June 2011 07:36:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:33 GMT