W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: definition of strict conformance

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:06:14 -0400
Message-Id: <a05111b53b975a23ec2b4@[24.201.26.36]>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 8:47 -0600 2002-08-01, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>Current text from GL.5:
>
>"Where all products of a class must be exactly alike, it should be 
>clear that a "strict conformance" policy is in effect for that 
>product class. Strict conformance is defined as conformance of an 
>implementation that employs only the requirements of the 
>specification and no more (e.g., no extensions)."
>
>Questions.  Are discretionary choices allowed?  Are optional features allowed?

I am on almost every call when a Spec goes forward from one step to 
the other. The last one I have reviewed is CSS TV profile

In the conformance section, I asked to Bert, but I think I should 
send an official comments to the WG to remove the item 5.

http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css-tv-20020515#section-conformance

"   5. If the source document comes with alternate style sheets (such 
as with the "alternate" keyword in HTML 4.0 [HTML40]), the TV-UA 
SHOULD allow the user to select one from among these style sheets and 
apply the selected one."

It doesn't make sense, because you have a conformance which says you 
can or not implement this feature and your product will still be 
conformant.

What could have be done, you have Conformance Level A with 5 and 
Conformance Level A- without 5.

So if there are discretionnary or optional features, when it comes to 
the Conformance, you have only MUST. The choices to implement them is 
just the fact to choose the policy of your conformance clause with 
level or not.

-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 6 August 2002 12:18:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:10 GMT