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

Conformance and Deprecated Features

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 08:28:13 -0500
Message-Id: <p05101201b87c51c6c88f@[]>
To: www-qa@w3.org

Today, Max Froumentin [1], MathML[2] staff contact, asks me about 
something interesting.

What should be done to reach conformance when there are deprecated 
features in a specification? Should the deprecated features be 
implemented because they are in the specifications and the DTD? If 
the deprecated features are not implemented can I still claim 

For the MathML specification, it's quite clear hopefully, but I guess 
it's not for some specifications when it occurs.

In MathML 2.0, Deprecated MathML 1.x Features [3]

MathML 2.0 contains a number of MathML 1.x features which are now 
deprecated. The following points define what it means for a feature 
to be deprecated, and clarify the relation between deprecated 
features and MathML 2.0 compliance.

1.	In order to be MathML-output-compliant, authoring tools may 
not generate MathML markup containing deprecated features.
2.	In order to be MathML-input-compliant, rendering/reading 
tools must support deprecated features if they are to be MathML 1.x 
compliant. They do not have to support deprecated features to be 
considered MathML 2.0 compliant. However, all tools are encouraged to 
support the old forms as much as possible.
3.	In order to be MathML-roundtrip-compliant, a processor need 
only preserve MathML equivalence on expressions containing no 
deprecated features.

[1] http://www.w3.org/People/maxf
[2] http://www.w3.org/Math/
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/chapter7.html#interf_deprec

Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 08:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:29 UTC