W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 18:58:05 +0200
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCAEPIHCAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 7:15 PM
> To: 'Julian Reschke'; 'WebDAV'
> Subject: RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
> Why should the spec be silent when people have reasonable questions
> about whether an issue works one way or another?  If no specific
> behavior is required, you must still say so.  Otherwise readers *will*
> assume.


I disagree. It's simply impractical to list all the things a spec doesn't
specify. If it's unspecified, readers MUST NOT assume. That being said, if
the WG thinks that there's a real risk that this particular part may be
misinterpreted, we surely can try to clarify (in case we decide that we want
this to stay server-defined).


<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 12:58:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:29 UTC