- From: Stefan Schumacher <stefan@duckflight.de>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 00:03:16 +0200
- To: www-qa@w3.org, w3c-query-editors@w3.org, spec-prod@w3.org
Hello, this comment is not so close to the topic testability. Itīs a good suggestion so far, and it would make for example translation work much easier as a side-effect. But all Editors have to go to school again to speak the "language" you will choose. There was made a good approach, using the xmlspec21.dtd (and the xmlspecD0.xsl) to provide a format, that gives some rules on the way to make specs very similar in syntax. With an xmlspecD0.xsl, that is changed into the demands of a certain language, you can simplify translation work and provide equal terms in different specs or their translations. But how many people/editors use the xmlspecXX.dtd or even have heard about it or like to learn how to handle it? Just look at the specs, that are very close to the XML spec. Infoset, Signature, SVG ... It would be useful to write the document below in XML, too. > http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2002/04/qaframe-spec-0429.html for the latest Just wanted to make clear, that it will be not so easy to follow such rules. Editors have to do much work that is more important , if only in their eyes or really is not my thing to judge. Happy working so far! Stefan PS, maybe we can go on with this discussion in one group, letīs say www-qa@w3.org? -- Stefan Schumacher Oesterberg 20 0172/2718968 58553 Halver 02353/130119 Germany www.schumacher-netz.de
Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 18:02:23 UTC