W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > March 2015

[Bug 28021] Normative vs. Non-Normative Text (Examples)

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:55:24 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-28021-523-Im6c5zZOXN@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28021

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com
         Resolution|---                         |WORKSFORME

--- Comment #1 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> ---
The XML Query and XSLT WGs discussed this bug report on today's call.

The introduction to the XQuery spec explains that examples are not normative. 
The WGs believe that the other passages you mention are instances of the
phenomenon described:  they are non-normative text, marked as non-normative by
being explicitly labeled as examples.  

If in any specific passage it is not clear whether a given sentence is a
continuation of an example or a normative statement following the example, then
a bug report against the specific passage is certainly in order.  In general,
the editors try to take some care that it's clear where examples begin and end,
but of course slips are possible.

In short, the WGs don't see an issue here.

Accordingly, I am marking this issue WORKSFORME.

Patrick, if you believe the arguments given above adequately address your
concerns, or if despite your lack of any such belief you are willing to accept
the WGs' disposition of your comment, please indicate as much by changing the
status of the bug report from RESOLVED to CLOSED.  If you are not satisfied
with the WGs' handling of the issue, please indicate so by changing the status
from RESOLVED to REOPENED, and explain why you do not find the arguments
compelling.  If we haven't heard from you in two weeks, we will take silence
for consent.

Thank you for your comments; I am sorry we were unable to resolve this in the
way you would have wished.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2015 20:55:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:53 UTC