W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2009

Re: ACTION-95, ISSUE-65: Plan to publish a new WD of HTML-5

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:52:07 -0800
Cc: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <A0FE2758-D221-4674-83AA-45B08B001C15@apple.com>
To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>

On Jan 28, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Murray Maloney wrote:

> At 05:00 AM 1/28/2009 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> [...]
>> But if there are multiple documents that separately normatively
>> specify the same thing, then it is equally possible that they  
>> disagree
>> and therefore at least one of the two is wrong. If one reference is
>> normative and the other is not, then it is at least clear which is
>> authoritative when they disagree.
> I like your logic and agree completely. Unfortunately, you left out
> a subsequent consequence, to wit: it remains unclear which is correct.
> Having to keep two documents synchrounously correct is certainly
> going to require some QA effort, but that will also yield a quality  
> product.

That is a fair point. It's even possible for even a single document to  
be incorrect; that is why specifications at times publish errata. And  
indeed engaged implementors will often take planned corrections as  
more authoritative than the standing specification text. But I think  
normative text having some sort of drafting error or unexpected  
consequence is a different kind of problem than a conflict between two  
normative texts.

Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 23:52:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:41 UTC