W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Comments on the WOFF Last Call

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:44:10 +0100
Message-ID: <1563317641.20110208154410@w3.org>
To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
CC: "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
On Wednesday, January 5, 2011, 6:35:22 PM, Stephen wrote:


SZ> 4.       It seems to be a bad practice to have two places where
SZ> conformance requirements are stated: in the normative text and in
SZ> the Summary of Conformance Requirements, perhaps one of these
SZ> should be described as informative and linked to the other.

We agree and are discussing several ways to resolve this.

One way, as you say, is to mark the appendix as informative and to link each requirement in the appendix to its defining instance in the normative prose.

Another option is to remove the appendix completely, if it adds no real value.


-- 
 Chris Lilley   Technical Director, Interaction Domain                 
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
 Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:44:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 June 2011 00:14:10 GMT