W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > August 2002

Re: conformance vs. compliance

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2002 11:52:13 -0400
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20020809114538.00aeb460@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: Art.Barstow@nokia.com, <www-qa@w3.org>
I agree that compliance has been used more with a marketing 
connotation  The terms are often used interchangeably and I think of them 
as being equivalent.  By the way - ISO Guide 2 defines conformity and not 
the term conformance.  However, in ISO Standards - there is always a 
conformance clause/section and not a conformity clause.


lynne



At 10:04 AM 8/9/02, Art.Barstow@nokia.com wrote:

>Does the QA WG consider the terms "conformance" and "compliance" 
>interchangeable?
>For example does the WG (and its tech reports) consider these two assertions
>equivalent:
>
>  1. My implementation is 100% compliant  with specification A
>  2. My implementation is 100% conformant with specification A
>
>If these assertions are not equivalent, what's the difference?
>
>Also, if the QA-GLOSSARY refered to in QA Framework: Operational Guidelines
>
>  http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2002/framework-20020507/qaframe-ops#b2ab3d443
>
>has become available, where can I find it?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Art Barstow
>---
Received on Friday, 9 August 2002 11:45:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:59 GMT