- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:14:56 -0400
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Pat Hayes wrote: >> Hi Dave snip >> >> I do not feel that it is the job of a specification to assist a parser >> writer. The job of a specification is to specify what needs specifying >> (and no more or less). If at any point there is a conflict between the >> task of assisting the reader in their task (e.g. writing a parser), and >> the principle aim of specifying I am clear that the reader should be >> left to seek assistance elsewhere. The reader should expect clarity from >> a spec, if they want a howto then they may need a different document. > > I strongly agree with this. Specs should inform, but not constrain any > more than absolutely required. If there is a neat way to help a newbie > get a parser (or whatever ) written, then put that in a primer or > expert-guide document, but not in the spec itself. I agree as well, but with the caveat that those other documents need to be written too! They don't necessarily have to be products of the WG (although they can be), but if the folks that know the specs best (which we hope at least *include* those that write them!) also know things about pitfalls (in either meaning or implementation) that readers/users of the specs are likely to fall into (typically because the writers have fallen into them themselves), or have other useful guidance that could be provided, ideally that *should* be provided (in clearly separate material). --Frank -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2001 09:14:05 UTC