- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 11:27:09 +0100
- 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 UTC