- 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