Re: WebPerfWG call - June 10th 2021 @ 10am PT

> On 25 Jun 2021, at 7:02 am, Nic Jansma <> wrote:
> RT #275: No mention to WebIDL in conformance section
>  • Yoav: AI to talk to Marcos and see what that means
>  • Nic: Marcos is suggesting that the change was intentional

Just to be clear, the redundant text is/was: 

The IDL fragments in this specification must be interpreted as
required for conforming IDL fragments, as described in the [[WEBIDL]] 

The above is like saying, "phrases written in the English language MUST be interpreted as [[English]]". It's tautological and redundant. 

The above text has somewhat dubious origins and it's a cary over from a bygone era of standardization at the W3C. Thus, if we see it in other specs, we should remove it as it adds no value.

As a further note, more modern specifications, such as those at the WHATWG, don't even bother with a Conformance section at all. I don't necessarily agree with taking it to that extreme, as I personally like to know what MUST, SHOULD, and MAY mean and who defines that - but want to give the group more context regarding the push to remove redundant boilerplate statements such of text above. 

Hope that help! 

Received on Friday, 25 June 2021 01:07:42 UTC