Re: Please review latest requirements draft before Wednesday, 22 January

Here are a few minor editorial comments. I do not wish discussion of
these comments to hold up publication of the draft on the W3C's
Technical Reports page. Thus if any of these comments  prove
controversial they should be ignored.

Section 5: instead of saying that techniques and checklists are
expected to be stored in the same document, what we really should say is
that they are expected to be "derived from the same XML document".

Also, remove the term "technology-specific" from the phrase
"technology-specific checklist item". As currently worded it implies
that there can be no checklist items for core techniques (i.e.,
techniques that are not specific to any technology), a result which I
doubt is intended; or do we want to limit checklists only to
technology-dependent items? I suggest we omit "technology-specific",
thereby allowing checklist items to be given that correspond to the
core techniques.

Note: these are only minor comments that I am entirely willing to
retract if they raise problems. In fact, all of my opinions (on all
subjects) are open to be retracted or modified if good reasons or
evidence to the contrary are presented.

Received on Saturday, 18 January 2003 02:58:22 UTC