W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > February 2005

[SpecGL] Formal vs Prose Good practice wording

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 15:32:26 -0500
Message-Id: <8478b100ecb17b21b1ec4df5f6f7daeb@w3.org>
To: 'www-qa-wg@w3.org' <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
AI-20050131-7 (KD) to propose a "good practice" on the issue of 
formal/prose language normativity, 2005-02-07


Do we really need a new "good practice"? I thought it was more a 
technique. There's a technique which already answer that.

	To avoid discrepancies between the English prose and the formal 
language, set up a process so that a given section is bound to a given 
part of the formal language, and one can't modified without the other.

We can add

	Be sure that both prose and formal languages are synchronized. You 
might try to implement the feature by following only the formal 
language, then try to implement a second time by following only the 
prose, and finally make a consistency checking.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 22:53:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:34 UTC