W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Fwd: Polyglot Markup Formal Objection Rationale

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 11:27:09 +0100
Message-ID: <5097947D.2040005@lachy.id.au>
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
CC: HTML WG LIST <public-html@w3.org>
On 2012-11-05 09:00, Glenn Adams wrote:
> To a certain extent, using the terms "normative" and "non-normative" with
> regard to publishing W3C documents is a mis-nomer. The W3C does not label
> documents as normative or non-normative. It labels them as REC or NOTE.

Yes, that is why I very clearly separated the two arguments.  The 
document itself claims to express normative criteria, which I disagree with.

> What determines if such a document is normative or not is not related to
> what the document calls itself, it relates to how other specifications
> (whether published by W3C or not) refer to it. A NOTE can be referenced as
> a normative document and a REC can be referenced as a non-normative
> document.
>
> So I suggest you de-focus on the notion of normativity, and instead simply
> focus on the advantages or disadvantages of using either REC or NOTE
> approach.

I don't think so. It's important to address both issues.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 10:27:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 November 2012 10:27:38 GMT