- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:44:10 +0100
- To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
On Wednesday, January 5, 2011, 6:35:22 PM, Stephen wrote: SZ> 4. It seems to be a bad practice to have two places where SZ> conformance requirements are stated: in the normative text and in SZ> the Summary of Conformance Requirements, perhaps one of these SZ> should be described as informative and linked to the other. We agree and are discussing several ways to resolve this. One way, as you say, is to mark the appendix as informative and to link each requirement in the appendix to its defining instance in the normative prose. Another option is to remove the appendix completely, if it adds no real value. -- Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 14:44:14 UTC