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

[SpecGL] Consistency in the vocabulary

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 14:53:12 -0400
Message-Id: <a05111b19b97ef759a4fc@[24.201.26.36]>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

It's very hard to define sometimes a kind of consistency in the spec 
of W3C because the way before are versionning, calling, updating the 
spec is very different.

I wonder if we should propose clear numbering and naming scheme.

Also, if we should define in the QA Framework (Core??? ;) ) a way to 
organize a technology or if it's the role of the TAG? For example, If 
you have Modules, create one Document by Module and create a Core 
Document. I don't say it's the good solution, I'm just saying that 
all the Family are inconsistent between families, and sometimes even 
in one family.


Examples:

* HTML Family
***************

HTML 3.2
HTML 4.0 	-> HTML 4.01 (Revised)
XHTML 1.0 	-> XHTML 1.0 2nd Edition (Revised)
XHTML Modularization
	Sub family XHTML Basic
XHTML 1.1
	Based on XHTML Modularization (XHTML Core?)
XHTML 2.0
	One spec with all the modules with their own semantic.
	"XHTML 2 is a member of the XHTML Family of markup
	languages. It is an XHTML Host Language as defined
	in XHTML Modularization."
	AND *** !!! ***
	"XHTML 2 updates many of the modules defined in
	XHTML Modularization 1.0 [XHTMLMOD], and includes
	the updated versions of all those modules and their
	semantics."
	Why they have not updated XHTML Modularization to
	XHTML Mod 2 and made a reference to it. It's inconsistent.

* CSS Family
**************

CSS Level 1	-> CSS Level 1 (Revised) only the date has changed
CSS Level 2	-> CSS Level 2 Revision 1 (ongoing revision) short name CSS 2.1
CSS 3 (becoming Modular) http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-roadmap/
	not more Level in the title, but in the text
	it's still CSS level 3 or CSS3.
	For example, in CSS3 module: Fonts,
	"The font decoration properties are new to CSS3."
	and 2 lines after
	"It contains a proposal for features to be included in CSS level 3."

	There's no CSS 3 Core, the roadmap could be, but it's not linked
	to the modules documents. For example,
	WebFonts http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-roadmap/#webfonts
	links to CSS2 and not to the CSS3 module:
	Web Fonts http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-webfonts-20020802/
	I guess it's a maintainance problem.

* DOM Family
**************

DOM Level 1 	 version 1.0 (Rec)
DOM Level 2 Core version 1.0 (Rec)
	DOM Level 2 Events version 1.0 (Rec)
	DOM Level 2 HTML   version 1.0 (LCWD)
	DOM Level 2 Style  version 1.0 (Rec)
	etc.
DOM Level 3 Core version 1.0 (WD)
	DOM Level 3 Events version 1.0 (LCWD)
	etc.

* MathML Family
*****************

MathML 1.0	-> MathML 1.01 (revised)
MathML 2.0

* SMIL
********

SMIL 1.0
SMIL 2.0
	SMIL 2.0 is modular but all in one document. An introductory
	chapter called "SMIL 2.0 Modules" (Core?) introduces the
	concepts. Each chapter is a module.
	You also have the notion of Profile defined in chapter 13
	and 14.

* SVG Family
**************

SVG 1.0
SVG 1.1
	Modularization of SVG 1.0
	Sub family SVG Mobile

* XML Family
**************

XML 1.0		-> XML 1.0 Second Edition (Revised)
XML 1.1
	New kind of spec which is a "patch" to the XML 1.0
	but which is different because the previous version is
	not XML 1.0.
	To have a full XML XX spec you have to add XML 1.0 2nd + XML 1.1
	Strange way to do it :)

* XSL Family
**************

XSL Version 1.0  /  XSLT Version 1.0
	The version is this time the numbering of the spec...
	Once again a different way to do it.


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

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2002 14:53:17 GMT

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