W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2004

Re: QAH draft for Wednesday

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:29:17 +0200
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>, www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1081873757.17227.377.camel@stratustier>
Le mar 13/04/2004 ŗ 18:07, Lofton Henderson a ťcrit :
> >4. Conformance
> >Do we really need this section.  I suggest removing it.  It adds nothing 
> >and may set a bad precedent.  Since this is a Handbook, we don't violate 
> >our own rule of having a conformance section in every specification.
> 
> I was debating this.  On the one hand, we say "Every W3C TR should have a 
> Conformance section".  Are we vulnerable to criticism if the QAH does 
> not?

Given the type of document QAH is, I think we'd better get rid of the
conformance section ; of course, it doesn't hurt if we say why in the
introduction (but keep it short).

Dom
-- 
Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/ERCIM
mailto:dom@w3.org


Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2004 12:29:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:15 GMT