[Bug 4675] add text in section 5.3.3 to require that consumers and producers are required to implement at a minimum the uri scheme

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4675





------- Comment #29 from kirk.wilson@ca.com  2008-01-16 18:54 -------
In the third public draft of SML-IF, the conformance definitions read something
like the following:

A level X  conforming SML-IF Document MUST adhere to all requirements in this
specification as described in the normative sections. . ..

(Just by way of a note: there is no definition of a normative section.)

The conformance definition states that a document needs to adhere to "all
requirements" in this specification in any and all normative sections.  This
statement needs some qualification because there seems to be two types of
normative statements: (1) statements directly about the structure and
characteristics of an SML-IF document, and (2) statements about the behavior of
consumers and producers of SML-IF documents.  Often, such these types of
statements are mixed in the same section, for example in sections 5.2.1 and
5.2.2.  Obviously a conforming document cannot adhere to statements of type 2. 
That’s obvious, BUT the definition still says "all requirements in this
specification".  Even if we assume that it will be clear to the reader what
requirements apply to the document itself and which we do not, the definitions
needs to make the distinction more explicit.

Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 18:54:45 UTC