W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2008

Re: Extensibility and Uniformity; defining "error" behavior

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:10:14 +0100
To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
Cc: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>, "Larry Masinter" <masinter@adobe.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.umzovcxb64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:57:07 +0100, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
> +2  I've always understood the word in more or less Larry's sense.  
> However, it don't see (contra other comments) that the criteria in  
> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/#crec   are necessarily at odds with Larry's  
> definition. This refers to test suites, which are collections of  
> examples provided by a specs authors which are used to illustrate  
> required or expected interoperation behaviors, such as not crashing or  
> delivering a certain type of response under certain conditions. The RDF  
> and OWL test suites, for example, consisted largely of example parsings,  
> entailments and non-entailments appropriate for fragments of RDF and OWL  
> syntax. None of this requires uniformity of the user agent's  
> implementation, only in certain aspects of its behavior (those required  
> for interoperability, in fact.)

Well, if you see it like that than Ian also simply means  
"interoperability" as the idea is that HTML5 roughly follows the CSS 2.1  
model here.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Tuesday, 30 December 2008 19:24:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:59 UTC