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

Re: [SpecGL Draft] A.1 GP Define the specification conformance model in the conformance clause.

From: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:59:03 +0200
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1091782742.1416.2430.camel@stratustier>
Hello Karl,

Le mar 03/08/2004 ŗ 22:21, Karl Dubost a ťcrit :
> Example:
> 	@@Is there a place with a conformance model explained@@

I think the diagram you produced for the Profile/module/level could be
leveraged to explain the conformance models of a few specs, with various
degrees of complexity; e.g.:
- XML 1.0 has 2 classes of products (document and processor), each of
those have 2 conformance degrees (well-formed/valid and
validating/non-validating); we could add xml:base, xml namespaces and
xlink as "modules" for xml even though they haven't really be defined as
such
- on the other hand, SVG 1.1 has roughly 4 classes of product (markup
fragments with various extents, generators, interpreters and viewers)
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-SVG11-20030114/conform.html
Some of these classes of product have various degrees of conformance
(e.g. static / dynamic for interpreters, static/dynamic * high-quality
for viewers); SVG 1.1 also defines modules, which are grouped into
profiles (tiny/mobile/full); having a nice diagram summarizing it would
be both interesting and instructive as to how complex a conformance
model can get once you start playing with DoV.

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


Received on Friday, 6 August 2004 05:02:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:17 GMT