W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2002

Exit criteria for Mobile Profile

From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 18:11:11 +0100
Message-ID: <15492.64559.972755.799166@jfouffa.inria.fr>
To: www-style@w3.org
The CSS working group discovered last week that it had never made the
"exit criteria" for the Mobile Profile[1] public. These are the
criteria the working group plans to apply to decide when the current
"Candidate Recommendation" is ready to become a "Recommendation."

They were sent to the W3C members, but never to any public place.
We'll probably put them in the test suite, but for now they are at
least in the archives of this list.

They are very similar to the criteria for the Selectors[2], but with
the difference that there we do not require all features of Selectors
to be implemented in the same application, while here we want
applications that implement all features at the same time. That is
basically what distinguishes a "profile" from a "module."

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css-mobile
[2] http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS3/Selectors/current



1. There must be at least two interoperable implementations implementing
'all' the features in the Mobile Profile. An implementation can
implement a superset of the features and claim conformance to the
profile. For the purposes of this criterion, we define the following
terms: 

        "feature" 
        a row in the tables of section 3 and section 4 that has not been
        marked 'No' in the CSS Mobile column. 
               
        "interoperable" 
        passing the respective test case(s) in the CSS test suite, or,
        if the implementation is not a web browser, an equivalent test. 
        Every relevant test in the test suite should have an equivalent
        test created if such a UA is to be used to claim 
        interoperability. In addition if such a UA is to be used to 
        claim interoperability, then there must one or more additional
        UAs which can also pass those equivalent tests in the same way
        for the purpose of interoperability. The equivalent tests must 
        be made publically available for the purposes of peer review. 
               
        "implementation" 
        a user agent which: 
           1. implements the feature. 
           2. is available (i.e. publicly downloadable or available
              through some other public point of sale mechanism). This
              is the "show me" requirement. 
           3. is shipping (i.e. development, private or
              unofficial versions are insufficient). 
           4. is not experimental (i.e. is intended for a wide audience
              and could be used on a daily basis.) 
             
2. A minimum of six months of the CR period must have elapsed. This is
to ensure that enough time is given for any remaining major errors to be
caught. 




Bert
-- 
  Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
  http://www.w3.org/people/bos/                              W3C/INRIA
  bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
  +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 12:11:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:13 GMT