W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: [css3-regions] Editorial comments round 1

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:37:48 -0800
Message-ID: <4F1F5CEC.601@inkedblade.net>
To: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 01/24/2012 11:57 AM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
>
>> 2. CSS regions concepts
>> -----------------------
>>
>> I think section could use some editorial work. I don't have specific
>> suggestions, but I do think it could use some reorganization.
>
> [vh] If you do not have suggestions, could you describe what issues you see?
> That will help me understand and see how to improve it.

Hard to say. Just seemed somewhat disorganized, broken up into many small
sections that are not parallel-ly constructed.

>> Also, definitions sections are generally normative, not non-normative.
>
> [vh] ok. I thought that normative text had to be made of testable assertions.
> Some of the text, like the definition of a region, is not testable. So I
> guess I was working with the wrong assumption?

Yeah, not testable != non-normative. If you remove the non-normative parts
of a spec, you should get the same spec, just harder to understand. :) If
you remove the definitions upon which your conformance requirements are
based, presumably the conformance requirements don't make much sense...

You might find this useful: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1140242962&count=1

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 01:38:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT