- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 21:42:44 +0800
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>, public-html@w3.org
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 13:43:36 UTC
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Leif Halvard Silli < xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Smylers, Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:37:37 +0000: > > > > The definition of the term "polyglot markup" is in a section explicitly > > marked as non-normative in the current draft spec, despite being linked > > to from elsewhere in that document as a definition: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-polyglot-20121025/#dfn-polyglot-markup > > I think it's confusing that this definition _isn't_ normative, and I > > don't understand what linking to a non-normative definition means, or > > how there can be normative requirements for creating something which > > doesn't itself have a normative definition. > > I believe that it is common, in specs, to denote principles (because > this is a principle and not a definition, I would say) as > non-normative. I believe this is also the way the HTML5 spec is > structured. > A definition of a principle in a spec can certainly be considered (by that spec) as a formal definition and can be marked as (a) normative (principle) within that spec. Perhaps here, the section defining "polyglot markup" should be marked as normative if it is used in a normative fashion elsewhere. FYI, all ISO and ITU standards consider defined terms/phrases as "normative" definitions [unless explicitly marked otherwise].
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 13:43:36 UTC