Re: ACTION-128: Draft @summary voting text in conjunction with PF

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Jul 6, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
[snip]
>> Thus, I think a suggested non-error diagnostic would be better than a 
>> requirement for a down-played error, in that it would give the advanced 
>> experts who choose to disregard the warning the opportunity to have 
>> their content be conforming.
> 
> I've now made the spec do the following except with the third bullet point 
> replaced with:
>  
>  * Made the summary="" attribute conforming but made with a warning from
>    conformance checkers that the attribute is obsolete.

Minor suggestion: change the spec to say "conformance checkers are 
required to >>>have the ability to<<< warn the user...", i.e. without 
requiring that this be optional or specifying what the default must be 
if an option is provided.

- Sam Ruby