RE: Proposed edit to 6.2 (conformance to w3c specifications)

Ian,

I think that this still leaves open the question: when a new proposal
becomes available that extends the standard, does you product become
immediately non-compliant, or only at the next revision?

I would think that an existing product could continue to claim compliance
with an older version of the spec until they do a major revision (whole
number?) as opposed to a bug-fix revision (decimal?).  But a product could
not achieve compliance for the first time unless it met the current
standard.  You could not today, for example, say that we now are compliant
with the UA guidelines for 11/99, if there were a 2/00 guideline in
existence.  With this sort of language in the compliance document, I'm all
for it.

Denis Anson

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On Behalf
Of Ian Jacobs
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 2:13 PM
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Subject: Proposed edit to 6.2 (conformance to w3c specifications)

In light of issue 196 [1] and my action item from the 3 February
teleconf [2] to harmonize the wording of checkpoint 6.2 with
that of the Authoring Tool Guidelines Recommendation [3], here's
a proposal to change 6.2.

<OLD UAAG>
Conform to W3C specifications when they are appropriate for a task.
</OLD>

<ATAG10>
Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are
available and appropriate for a task.
</ATAG10>

<PROPOSED UAAG10>
Use and conform to W3C specifications when they are
available and appropriate for a task.
</PROPOSED>

[1] http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0271.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-ATAG10-20000203

--
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel/Fax:                     +1 212 684-1814 or 212 532-4767
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Monday, 21 February 2000 14:40:55 UTC