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

Re: &foo= in attribute values (and why defining conformance matters)

From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:09:11 +0900
To: Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090617150908.GB10019@sideshowbarker>
Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>, 2009-06-12 18:49 -0400:

>  On 6/12/09 6:22 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > It defines what QA tools like conformance checkers
>  Oh, I forgot to mention: "conformance checker" is an incredibly vapid piece 
>  of newspeak. They're only checking "conformance" because you classified 
>  large parts of the working, interoperable grammar as such.

Do you mean that you believe "conformance checker" is absolutely a
misleading term -- and that you think there's some term other than
"conformance checker" that should instead be used to describe
validator.nu or other such tools? Or did you just mean that the
term is misleading in the specific instance you cite above?


Michael(tm) Smith
Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2009 15:09:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:49 UTC