W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-diffs@w3.org > April 2011

hixie: apply wg decision (whatwg r5996)

From: poot <cvsmail@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:34:16 -0400
To: public-html-diffs@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Q9n68-00060q-6f@jay.w3.org>
hixie: apply wg decision (whatwg r5996)


RCS file: /sources/public/html5/spec/Overview.html,v
retrieving revision 1.4817
retrieving revision 1.4818
diff -u -d -r1.4817 -r1.4818
--- Overview.html	12 Apr 2011 22:13:52 -0000	1.4817
+++ Overview.html	12 Apr 2011 23:32:26 -0000	1.4818
@@ -2545,7 +2545,11 @@
   documents<span class="impl"> (relevant to authors and authoring tool
-  <p><dfn id="conforming-documents">Conforming documents</dfn> are those that comply with all
+  <p><dfn id="conforming-html5-documents">Conforming
+  HTML5
+  documents</dfn> are those that comply with all
   the conformance criteria for documents. For readability, some of
   these conformance requirements are phrased as conformance
   requirements on authors; such requirements are implicitly
@@ -2559,6 +2563,18 @@
   would imply that documents are not allowed to contain elements named
   <code title="">foobar</code>.</p>
+<!-- The following paragraph is not included in the WHATWG copy
+because it is wrong. For example, content models are not syntax. It's
+also unnecessary. What kinds of things are conformance requirements is
+explained in the previous section, which talks about RFC 2119. -->
+  <p class="note">the conformance requirements for documents include
+  syntax (the &lt;table&gt; element is conforming as a child of
+  &lt;body&gt;, but not as a child ot &lt;title&gt;), and semantics (the
+  &lt;table&gt; elements denotes a multi-dimensional data table, not a
+  piece of furniture).</p>
   <p class="note impl">There is no implied relationship between
   document conformance requirements and implementation conformance
   requirements. User agents are not free to handle non-conformant
@@ -2741,8 +2757,12 @@
     <p>Authoring tools and markup generators must generate
-    <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming documents</a>. Conformance criteria that apply
-    to authors also apply to authoring tools, where appropriate.</p>
+    <a href="#conforming-html5-documents">conforming
+    HTML5
+    documents</a>. Conformance criteria that apply to authors also
+    apply to authoring tools, where appropriate.</p>
     <p>Authoring tools are exempt from the strict requirements of
     using elements only for their specified purpose, but only to the
@@ -3168,19 +3188,41 @@
   specification to their activities decides that they will recognize
   the requirements of such an extension specification, it becomes an
   <dfn id="other-applicable-specifications" title="other applicable specifications">applicable
-  specification</dfn> for the purposes of conformance requirements in
-  this specification.</p>
-  <!-- http://www.w3.org/mid/17E341CD-E790-422C-9F9A-69347EE01CEB@iki.fi -->
+  specification</dfn>.
-  <p class="note">Someone could write a specification that defines any
-  arbitrary byte stream as conforming, and then claim that their
-  random junk is conforming. However, that does not mean that their
-  random junk actually is conforming for everyone's purposes: if
-  someone else decides that that specification does not apply to their
-  work, then they can quite legitimately say that the aforementioned
-  random junk is just that, junk, and not conforming at all. As far as
-  conformance goes, what matters in a particular community is what
-  that community <em>agrees</em> is applicable.</p>
+  <p>The conformance terminology for documents depends on the nature
+  of the changes introduced by such applicable specificactions, and on
+  the content and intended interpretation of the document. Applicable
+  specifications MAY define new document content (e.g. a foobar
+  element), MAY prohibit certain otherwise conforming content (e.g.
+  prohibit use of &lt;table&gt;s), or MAY change the semantics, DOM
+  mappings, or other processing rules for content defined in this
+  specification. Whether a document is or is not a <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming HTML5 document</a> does not
+  depend on the use of applicable specifications: if the syntax and
+  semantics of a given <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming
+  HTML5 document </a>document is unchanged by the use of applicable
+  specification(s), then that document remains a <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming HTML5 document</a>. If the
+  semantics or processing of a given (otherwise conforming) document
+  is changed by use of applicable specification(s), then it is not a
+  <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming HTML5 document</a>. For
+  such cases, the applicable specifications SHOULD define conformance
+  terminology.</p>
+  <p class="note">As a suggested but not required convention, such
+  specifications might define conformance terminology such as:
+  "Conforming HTML5+X<!---->XX document", where X!XX is a short
+  name for the applicable specification. (Example: "Conforming
+  HTML5+AutomotiveExtensions document").</p>
+  <p class="note">a consequence of the rule given above is that
+  certain syntactically correct HTML5 documents may not be <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming HTML5 documents</a> in the
+  presence of applicable specifications. (Example: the applicable
+  specification defines &lt;table&gt; to be a piece of furniture &mdash;
+  a document written to that specification and containing a &lt;table&gt;
+  element is NOT a <a href="#conforming-documents">conforming HTML5
+  document</a>, even if the element happens to be syntactically
+  correct HTML5.)</p>
   <hr><p>User agents must treat elements and attributes that they do not
   understand as semantically neutral; leaving them in the DOM (for DOM
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 23:34:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:52 UTC