Re: formal vs. prose and PR [was: Re: Final minutes QA WG Teleconference May 16]

Le lundi 23 mai 2005 à 12:03 -0400, Al Gilman a écrit :
> "Formal vs prose language normativity"
> 
> .. for which the QA Working Group has failed to do due diligence to
> resolve the issue.

I think it's unfair to say we have failed in this regard; my last post
on this was sent on Friday, and I'm still waiting for a reply from Ian
on the topic.

> That is to say a phalanx of consistent comment from customers has been
> ignored, and the Working Group has left an ill-considered requirement
> in the document.

Although I disagree the requirement is ill-considered, it seems pretty
clear to me that there is a lack of consensus on the matter, and I think
the WG should revisit its wording to allow for more flexibility on how
to deal with the perceived problem. Typically, instead of saying
"explain which takes precedence", we could simply say "there are often
extensive overalap between prose and formal language, so beware of any
discrepancies between them" or something like that.

(I expect the QA WG will discuss this next week, although I won't attend
that call)

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