W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2003

[errorHandling-20] CLOSED: What should specifications say about error handling?

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:45:47 +0100
Message-ID: <14627455208.20031202194547@w3.org>
To: Rob Lanphier <robla@real.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

Hello Rob,

At our Yokohama f2f meeting, the TAG noticed that many aspects of the
issue you raised [1] and which we accepted as issue 20 [2]

errorHandling-20: What should specifications say about error handling?

are by now addressed in the current Architecture Document [3].

Specifically, section 1.2.3 [4] discusses error handling, requires
specification of error handling, and establishes that silent recovery
from errors is harmful, thus addressing your 'second guessing' point.

Section 4.2 [5] discusses extensibility and versioning, what
specifications should say about when to ignore extensions and when
extensions must be understood.

You also raised the issue of conformance to deprecated features, and
suggested it might be a different issue. It seems that a deprecated
feature is one that content authors and authoring tools should not
produce, and that content consumers must understand.

We propose therefore to close issue 20 as already addressed. Please
let us know whether you are satisfied with this outcome. Thanks again
for your help and contributions,


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002May/0124
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#errorHandling-20
[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20031128
[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20031128/#error-handling
[5] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2003/webarch-20031128/#ext-version

-- 
 Chris                          mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2003 13:45:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:23 GMT