- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 15:42:20 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@datadirect-technologies.com>
- cc: <scott_boag@us.ibm.com>, <spec-prod@w3.org>, <w3c-query-editors@w3.org>, <www-qa@w3.org>
Well, in order to be able to test specification implementation it is helpful to impose these constraints on the way the spec is written. I agree that it adds to the already significant workload of editors who are not doing this, but I think it is an important part of ensuring the quality of our specifications to enable them to be tested. Cheers Chaals On Mon, 6 May 2002, Jonathan Robie wrote: At 01:29 PM 5/6/2002 -0400, scott_boag@us.ibm.com wrote: > Encourage document editors to view some of the sentences as "test > assertions" and to write them in a style that conveys precisely what > they declare. > Explore possibilities for machine processing of testable sentences in > the future. This sounds like it might force a particular writing style and constrain the sentence structures used by editors. Am I reading too much into this? I am concerned about anything that would increase the work load or the constraints on editors. We've got an enormous amount of work to do as it is. Jonathan -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 15:42:22 UTC