W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2011

Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to origin

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:51:07 -0600
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=LAt6fN0eZzU1azLbnFZ_TVbEtzw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotypeimaging.com>, "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>, StyleBeyondthePunchedCard <www-style@w3.org>, "public-webfonts-wg@w3.org" <public-webfonts-wg@w3.org>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>, "Martin J." <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
That may be the case, but it is outside of nominal W3C processes, and is not
understood by members to be part of the process of going to REC. Further, it
certainly does not constitute a compliance testing or certification process.

G.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>wrote:

>  The CSS WG has agreed that in order to drop their vendor prefix
> implementors will have to publish an IR - and, if need be, the testcases
> used for this IR - to demonstrate how and why they believe their unprefixed
> version to be conformant with the spec.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2011 5:07 PM
> *To:* Sylvain Galineau
> *Cc:* Levantovsky, Vladimir; liam@w3.org; StyleBeyondthePunchedCard;
> public-webfonts-wg@w3.org; www-font@w3.org; Martin J.
>
> *Subject:* Re: css3-fonts: should not dictate usage policy with respect to
> origin****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
> wrote:****
>
> UA vendors demonstrate conformance with a CSS module by publishing an
> implementation report (IR) based on a test suite reviewed and approved by
> the WG.****
>
> ** **
>
> That may be the case, but it is not the purpose of the IR or the test
> suite. The purpose of W3C IRs and test suites is to demonstrate two or more
> implementations of each defined feature. This is a defined part of the W3C
> process with the express goal of demonstrating the implementability of
> defined features.****
>
> ** **
>
> Testing or verifying compliance of an implementation with a W3C spec is NOT
> the purpose of the IR or a W3C test suite. Notwithstanding this fact, such a
> test suite may be a useful tool in such a process, but it is not the purpose
> of the IR or test suite.****
>
> ** **
>
> The W3C does not publish compliance requirements on real world
> implementations nor does it define a process by means of which an
> implementation may be certified to be compliant (with conformance
> requirements).****
>
> ** **
>
> G.****
>
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 00:51:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT