- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:14:02 +0300
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: "'www-qa-wg@w3.org'" <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
Good catch, I'll re-read and correct accordingly. Thanks, /Dimitris On 25 Apr 2005, at 18:07, Karl Dubost wrote: Le 25 avr. 2005, à 03:56, Dimitris Dimitriadis a écrit : > Karl's implementation report of xml:id [4], the SISR Conformance > assessment [5] and my own findings. My report has been done on XML id, 2004-11-09 http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/ > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-id/2004Dec/0009 Dimitris, You say "NO" in Requirement 08 for XML:id with the following comment: [[[There are a few "RFC2119:SHOULD" in your specification in the section 4. Though the conformance section doesn't explain if a conformant XML Processor have to implement all MUST only or MUST and SHOULD. This could be also solved by making a Basic Level and a Full level of Conformance. Or just indicate that the "MUST" MUST be implemented to be conformant.]]] Is it done against this version, maybe it solves your answer: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-xml-id-20050208/#conformance [[[ Conformance to constraints that “must” be assured is mandatory. It is recommended that applications assure the other constraints as well. This specification defines no simply optional constraints. ]]] -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 25 April 2005 15:14:07 UTC