Re: Support Existing Content

Le 2 mai 2007 à 06:48, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
> Regardless of who concurs or not, it is true. Split conformance  
> requirements are a matter of fact, not opinion. Here is a specific  
> example, from the definition of the 'img' element:
> <>
> Now, it's possible to debate whether the spec goes far enough in  
> splitting user agent and document requirements. But whether it does  
> so at all is not debatable.

It doesn't do it in a very effective way and not very visible indeed.
Again and again,
	1. [define class of products][1]
	2. identify each categories
	3. address each categories with conformance requirements  

1. is mostly done with maybe things missing. (on my QA review to come)
2. is not done as in
	Web browsers and other interactive user agents  -> key1
	Non-interactive presentation user agents        -> key2
3. is not done at all

Right now the specification shows a green block of text which seemed  
to be the requirements and then there is text which seems  
instructions. There might be improvement to write for the [how to  
read the specifications][2]

I'm pretty sure there is a question of layout and labeling the  
specification. That would require a refactoring. Maybe designing a  
template for each individual things.


Karl Dubost -
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog -
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2007 09:55:46 UTC