W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

informal survey - on spec philosophy

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:40:29 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+cGErU22ScOjrJ5yXSHhe_oyZKA=YoY6Ci_NZtHGVjrVQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
It has been stated to me that, at least for "open web platform standards",
the following statement is true and is shared by the majority:

"if it isn't written in the spec, it isn't allowed by the spec"

I happen to disagree with the truth of this, based on my personal
experience both with spec writing and with implementation/use of specs, but
I would be curious to see who agrees with this idea or not.

The case in point is an instance of a possible ambiguity in a spec because
a particular assumption/convention is not documented; i.e., an assumption
that something isn't allowed even though it isn't explicitly disallowed.
While I agree it is, in general, impossible (or at least impractical) to
document all disallowances, I do believe it is important to document
important disallowances, particular when there are concerns raised about
spec ambiguity.

Received on Monday, 26 March 2012 20:41:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:39 UTC