- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:37:05 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10879
Summary: Including "impossible" requirements even as a SHOULD
is unnecessary
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
URL: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/infrastructure.html#confo
rmance-requirements
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson)
AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
ReportedBy: adrianba@microsoft.com
QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org,
public-html@w3.org
The spec states that "Conformance checkers...should also check that the input
document conforms when parsed with a browsing context in which scripts execute,
and that the scripts never cause non-conforming states to occur other than
transiently during script execution itself. (This is only a "SHOULD" and not a
"MUST" requirement because it has been proven to be impossible.)
Making a requirement a SHOULD instead of a MUST if it has been proven
impossible is unncessary and should be removed. If there editor believes there
is a different recommendation to be made here, it should be worded
appropriately.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 30 September 2010 17:37:08 UTC