Re: Extension/Extensibility examples in W3C Specifications

[dropping www-qa-wg, no need to cross post]

Hi Lynne,

Le mar 04/05/2004 à 14:19, Lynne Rosenthal a écrit :
> This is in contrast to Mark's view (which I finally understand) - His view 
> is that, if you use the defined mechanism, then it isn't an 
> extension.

Thanks for this clarification ; for what it's worth, this is probably
the first time I see "extension" used in this meaning ; are there any
references that could incite us to use this one, rather the one which I
think is more common in W3C?

> With Mark's definition, profiles, modules, levels are not considered 
> extensions.

I think profiles, modules, levels are not considered extensions as long
as they are defined as standards, even in my current understanding of
extensions.

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