- From: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:32:35 -0700
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
I'll quote Nick's email from back in April here: "What is normative is that one adheres to the Abstract Model for any Realizations. It's not normative to, for instance, have to implement a QSA API just because you implemented an HTTP API according to the Abstract Model." -Annette On 9/24/19 9:52 PM, Lars G. Svensson via GitHub wrote: > A further comment from @agreiner that came over the [mailing > list](http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Sep/0872.html) > as a reply to [Karen's > comment](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/544#issuecomment-534764141): > >> Looking back at my big edit on that section, I did say "Unlike the >> HTTP-header realization, which is also the subject of an independent >> IETF document [PROF-IETF], this realization is fully specified here, >> though it is not normative." > I thought we had agreed that the QSA realization was not to be > normative. There was general approval to my edits when I submitted > them, except that Nick wanted to keep the original heading, as I recall. -- Annette Greiner (she) NERSC Data and Analytics Services Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2019 17:33:03 UTC