W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > May 2002

Conformance of new vs. old specs

From: Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 18:25 +0900
To: www-i18n-comments@w3.org
Cc: jim.melton@acm.org (Jim Melton)
Message-Id: <20020531092529.DD5D71421@toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>

This is a last call comment from Jim Melton (jim.melton@acm.org) on
the Character Model for the World Wide Web 1.0
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/).

Semi-structured version of the comment:

Submitted by: Jim Melton (jim.melton@acm.org)
Submitted on behalf of (maybe empty): W3C XML Query Working Group
Comment type: editorial
Chapter/section the comment applies to: 2 Conformance
The comment will be visible to: public
Comment title: Conformance of new vs. old specs
Comment:
Section 2, "Conformance", contains the following statements:

[S] Every W3C specification MUST:

   1. conform to the requirements applicable to specifications,
   2. specify that implementations MUST conform to the requirements applicable to software, and
   3. specify that content created according to that specification MUST conform to the requirements applicable to content.

[S] If an existing W3C specification does not conform to the requirements in this document, then the next version of that specification SHOULD be modified in order to conform.

It seems strange that "Every...specification MUST...conform to the requirements", but that existing specifications that do not conform "SHOULD be modified".  While we assume that the intent is to require conformance by *new* specifications without mandating updates to existing specifications solely for conformance reasons, the wording is certainly surprising and could be made clearer.


Structured version of  the comment:

<lc-comment
  visibility="public" status="pending"
  decision="pending" impact="editorial">
  <originator email="jim.melton@acm.org" represents="W3C XML Query Working Group"
      >Jim Melton</originator>
  <charmod-section href='http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/#sec-Conformance'
    >2</charmod-section>
  <title>Conformance of new vs. old specs</title>
  <description>
    <comment>
      <dated-link date="2002-05-31"
        >Conformance of new vs. old specs</dated-link>
      <para>Section 2, "Conformance", contains the following statements:

[S] Every W3C specification MUST:

   1. conform to the requirements applicable to specifications,
   2. specify that implementations MUST conform to the requirements applicable to software, and
   3. specify that content created according to that specification MUST conform to the requirements applicable to content.

[S] If an existing W3C specification does not conform to the requirements in this document, then the next version of that specification SHOULD be modified in order to conform.

It seems strange that "Every...specification MUST...conform to the requirements", but that existing specifications that do not conform "SHOULD be modified".  While we assume that the intent is to require conformance by *new* specifications without mandating updates to existing specifications solely for conformance reasons, the wording is certainly surprising and could be made clearer.</para>
    </comment>
  </description>
</lc-comment>
Received on Friday, 31 May 2002 05:26:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:31 GMT