- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 02:15:44 -0500
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-evangelist@w3.org <public-evangelist@w3.org>
Le 06 janv. 2005, à 00:53, Bjoern Hoehrmann a écrit : > This does not seem all that interesting to me, http://www.google.com > and http://www.amazon.com/ have too little in common to compare them > in a meaningful way. http://validator.w3.org/detailed.html for example The meaning of this survey would be that some elements or attributes are never used, which basically put into questions their notion of useful, IMHO :))) >> * Qualitative analysis (human) >> - Are the elements and the attributes used appropriately? >> - Is it NOT possible to define the proper use? > > It is possible to define proper use, but determining proper use through > reliable human-testing is at least very difficult, about as difficult > as > to determine whether a HTML/XHTML document meets the requirements of > the > relevant specifications due to W3C's failure to provide and maintain > sufficient quality of these specifications. agreed > To an extend where W3C Team > members start projects and W3C Working Groups charter themselves to > fill > these gaps with Guidelines, Best Practise documents, and modified > document formats. If someone could hear you :)))) -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2005 07:15:28 UTC