- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 09:26:41 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Karl Dubost wrote: > > > Le 19 mai 2007 à 10:33, David Woolley a écrit : >> Karl Dubost wrote: >> >>> Would Conformance address your request? A conformance section has in >>> its goals: >> >> I doubt it. Conformance sections are generally only really understood >> by people who are expert in reading standards. > > hmm interesting. > A specification is not done for someone who doesn't know HTML, as it is It's also done for those who are going to write the documentation for authors of prepare lectures for them. (For software documentation, standards are actually quite useful for people writing to the standard, as they often explain important boundyar cases that the man page writer didn't bother about.) Given the often poor technical quality of user documentation, they can also be use to resolve disputes about correct usage, in which case only a small part of the standard is likely to be read, which is unlikely to be the conformance part. > not a tutorial. It is the goal of a specification to be read by > implementers. > Now, it doesn't mean that the HTML WG will not produce tutorials, but Tutorials are probably the least significant type of author documentation; most authors will never read them from cover to cover, but they really need to be read in substantial chunks. The other types are: - cook books, i.e. samples of code that can be used for common functions without being understood - unfortunately the web itself is one of the main cookbooks! - references, which typically describe individual elemens, and may include indexes by functional area; they may also include syntax information, but that is less likely to be read; - college lectures, which are becoming more significant and is the only way that most authors will ever receive any structured explanation.
Received on Sunday, 20 May 2007 08:27:02 UTC