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

Re: [SpecGL] Consistency in the vocabulary

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 16:53:23 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020813164113.03d39420@rockynet.com>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Karl,

This is a nice survey of the current usage of versions, levels, editions, 
revisions, etc.  Do you think we should integrate or somehow reference it 
in Spec Extech?  Or develop it into a quick QA Note?  Or...?

Further comments...

At 02:53 PM 8/13/02 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:

>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.

There should be better consistency.  But should QA do it, or Comm, or TAG, 
or a collaboration, or ...?  Note this from the Manual of Style, section 9.1.1:

"The name of your document in the document head and on the technical 
reports index [TR] will read as follows. Optional elements are in square 
brackets.

Title [(ACRONYM)] ["Level" n] ["Specification"][: Subtitle] ["Module"] 
[(nth "Edition")] ["Version" Version_Number]

Try not to invent a new naming convention. Capitalize title words following 
U.S. usage."

It doesn't say any more about how any of the terms "Level", "Module", 
"Edition", "Version" should be 
used.  (From:  http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#title)


>Also, if we should define in the QA Framework (Core??? ;) )

My first thought is that we should talk to Comm about it.  This seems to 
fall somewhere between SpecGL, pubrules, and Manual of Style.

-Lofton.

>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 18:53:17 GMT

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