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

Re: Conformance Degrees

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: 09 Aug 2002 09:31:12 +0200
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1028878274.16595.64.camel@stratustier>

Le jeu 08/08/2002 ŗ 19:07, Lofton Henderson a ťcrit :
> I haven't tackled the verbiage of the CK11.1 yet.  But I decided to edit 
> our conformance clause to "try it out".  I realized that there are really 
> two separate aspects:
> 
> 1.) the verbiage we use to describe conformance (degrees, categories, 
> designations, [NOT] levels);
> 2.) the actual conformance labels.
> 
> E.g., we could say:
> 
> "SpecGL defines three degrees of conformance, whose labels are:  1st 
> degree, 2nd ..."
> 
> or we could say:
> 
> "SpecGL defines three degrees of conformance, whose labels are:  "A 
> Conforming", "AA Con..."
> 
> Please read the attached, and reply with your preference.  (Altho' I prefer 
> the second, the first does allow us to say, "let's give 'em the Third 
> Degree".  Okay, bad pun.)

I'm fine with keeping the labels "A Conforming", ...

Dom
-- 
Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/INRIA
mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Friday, 9 August 2002 03:31:21 GMT

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