Re: oddities in our Conformance Model

Le mercredi 20 avril 2005 à 18:06 +0200, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux a
écrit :
>  It could also be solved by classifying the GPs as
> > "normative, optional", saying that it's better than plain Conforming
> > to satisfy as many GPs as possible, but not defining any designation
> > other than "Conforming" ( == "does all Rqts").
> 
> I like the latter approach; of course we need to find the right wording
> for it... Would you have a draft proposal?

If we go that way, we also need to make sure to update the text in the
introduction of the document, where Good Practices are described as
informative (or non-normatives) in several places.

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