- From: <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 03:27:36 -0000
- To: www-html-editor@w3.org
Hi,
This is a QA Review comment for "XHTML 2.0"
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml2-20060726/
2006-07-26
8th WD
About http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml2-20060726/terms.html
The definitions are sometimes not very clear and difficult to understand. Check XHTML 2.0 definitions against the W3C Glossary. For example, some definitions seem to be trapped in a model.
"abstract module
a unit of document type specification corresponding
to a distinct type of content, corresponding to a
markup construct reflecting this distinct type."
and then in the same page
"module
an abstract unit within a document model expressed as
a DTD fragment, used to consolidate markup declarations
to increase the flexibility, modifiability, reuse and
understanding of specific logical or semantic structures."
What about a module defined with a schema and not a DTD? The definition varies with regards to the one done on QA Glossary.
"
Module
A collection of semantically related features
that represents a unit of functionality."
- http://www.w3.org/QA/glossary.html#module
Another example
"driver
a generally short file used to declare and
instantiate the modules of a DTD. A good rule of thumb
is that a DTD driver contains no markup declarations
that comprise any part of the document model itself."
"Good rule of thumb" is not appropriate in a definition section.
Double check all definitions with technical writers and implementers outside of the WG. People inside the WG know too much the technology to have a different light on the technology.
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 17 August 2006 03:27:51 UTC