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

Re: discussion on Extension text of SpecLite

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:22:16 +0200
To: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1082546536.9760.387.camel@stratustier>
Le mar 20/04/2004 ŗ 17:15, Lynne Rosenthal a ťcrit :
> 1.  Designing extensibility into your specification - can this be done for 
> all specifications or are there some technologies and areas (e.g., I18N, 
> Accessibility) that don't apply?

I guess the approach we recommend should be slightly different: 1st
consider whether some parts of the specification you're designing will
benefit from being extended, and then see how you can integrate this
extensibility in your design.

Regarding excluding some areas, I would have though accessibility would
be an area where extensibility is not desired, but it appeared pretty
clearly during their TP F2F that they were actually actively thinking to
develop an extensibility mechanism, so that proprietary formats (or
non-yet existent standard formats) could create extensions to WCAG2
applied to their case.

> 2. The complexity inherent to DoV interaction is not presented.  Should 
> there be a discussion and/or requirement about the interrelationship 
> between extensions and other DoV?  Can this be accomplished with through 
> examples and scenarios?

I would love seeing this explained through examples ; the way I envision
it would be a general statement about how extensions increase
variability between implementations, and then one or two well-spotted
examples illustrating how this can affect interoperability, and how this
can be resolved ; it's unlikely I'll have time to come up with these
examples before Monday, but I'll try to get something in the wiki then.

> 3.  It may be the case that the second area, (extensions affect 
> conformance) is not exclusive to extensions, applying to any optional 
> behavior.   Are there things in this section that only apply to extensions?
> 
I think so ; as David stated Monday:
* not contradicting the core specification is something specific to the
extensibility mechanism
* the notion of strict conformance probably belongs to this area, too,
since that's pretty specific to extensions IIRC.

Dom

> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Apr/0040.html
> [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/ExtensionSpeclite  (wiki)
-- 
Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/ERCIM
mailto:dom@w3.org


Received on Wednesday, 21 April 2004 07:22:24 GMT

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