W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: [widgets] How to divorce widgets-digsig from Elliptic Curve PAG?

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:22:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+ddGEGkE==d7e3d27gAwjodfRt2J0bFZYZyvekm8bLw2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:

> in other words, I believe that the W3C's tasks do not necessarily have to
> include normatively defining specific concrete version mappings for
> dependent spec references; this can be accomplished in (2), which need not
> be done by the W3C (and indeed has not been done historically, i.e.,
> defining the criteria for successful certification);
>

a clarification is perhaps in order; when I say that the W3C has not
historically defined the criteria for successful certification, I mean that
the W3C has not published "compliance test specifications"; nonetheless, it
is true that in defining conformance criteria and levels, the W3C has
specified, to a certain degree of abstraction, some (but not all) criteria
that would go into (or be referenced by) a compliance test specification;
the point is that there is some abstraction at the level of W3C conformance
definition that must (already) be made more concrete at the
compliance/certification layer;

in this regard, the proposal to make use of non-specific (unversioned)
references is consistent with providing a certain degree of abstraction
that facilitates further concrete definition in the
compliance/certification phases;

G.
Received on Monday, 19 December 2011 17:23:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:49 GMT