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

Re: Answer to Ian Hickson: Formal vs prose language normativity

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 13:16:55 -0400
Message-Id: <8E9653A4-DB9D-4E8A-921E-9BF611014294@w3.org>
To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, www-qa@w3.org

Le 05-05-16 à 12:08, Al Gilman a écrit :
> Of course.
> Case WG is alive, spec is in CR:

Then no question… :)
The specification has to be fixed.  I don't see any issues here as  
it's out of the scope of the Good Practice we are talking about. A  
bogus specification which is in development process MUST be fixed.

> Case WG is dead, spec is in legacy mode:

Which is mostly the case we are talking about or more exactly:

     "Specification is already published."

Then what's happening.  Just to make the discussion clear.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 16 May 2005 17:22:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:36 UTC