W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > July 2003

AI-20030623-1 ("discretion")

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 09:05:34 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030630152203.03ad1280@rockynet.com>
To: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 10:58 PM 6/24/03 -0400, you wrote:
>[...]
>Summary of New Action Items:
>AI-20030623-1  Lofton:  To write up a few sentences for the conformance 
>clause (section 3) to address the dov of dov issue with 8.1. - Monday 
>(June 30).
>[...]
>Dave, there are some other GLs that are more discretionary than these DOV, 
>say the GL about TOC having easy way to find conformance requirements.
>
>Lofton can see how we could pass this requirement by making a comment with 
>in section 3 (the conformance clause) about how there is some allowances 
>for implementors to make decisions while trying to avoid getting into the 
>meta notion which would be very confusing.

What I had in mind during the telecon was something like this (new 
subsection to "3. Conformance")...

3.x Discretion

These specification guidelines grant wide discretion to writers of W3C 
specifications.  Each of the Dimensions of Variability (DoV -- guidelines 
@@N - M@@).represents a discretionary item for specification authors.  For 
example, it is the choice of the Working Group choice whether to use 
modules or not (Guideline x), whether or not to allow extensions (Guideline 
y), and for what classes of product to define conformance (Guideline 
z).  Considerable discretion is also granted to specification authors in 
the specific details (techniques and methods) of how the requirements of 
many (@@most?@@) of the checkpoints are satisfied.
=====

-Lofton.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 11:05:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:14 GMT