- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 07:35:26 -0500
- To: Gary Feldman <gfeldman@marsdome.com>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
Le 03 févr. 2005, à 22:02, Gary Feldman a écrit : > I disagree. The formal language is far more useful for the humans who > have to create the tests or the code. It's concise, precise, and > unambiguous. It's often easier to do a reliable implementation from > the formal spec - recursive decent parsers (or any hand-written lexer > or parser), for example. > I've always thought that the prose should focus on motivation and > decision processes, while avoiding anything that might resemble a > normative description unless there is really no choice. Just as a side note. It's impossible to express every requirements with a formal language like XML for example. Björn could give you plenty of examples about it. The QAWG will address your question. -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 12:35:27 UTC