- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 11:52:25 +0000
- To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>, public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org, www-international <www-international@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote: > One important aspect of above sentence is that - as Yves pointed out - the > "must" would be a lower case "must". That is, this will be no testable > assertation of the ITS 2.0 specification, even if the spec says "the > consumer must support UTF-8". In that sense, we might even put that > requirement into a note, to make clear that from the ITS 2.0 point of view > this is rather guidance than a normative statement. Would that work for you > too, Norbert? 1) Don't use RFC 2119 terms in any capitalization anywhere if they are not meant to be normative. That's confusing and wrong. 2) Isn't ITS 2.0 in part markup? All markup languages require utf-8. 3) Requiring utf-8 support also does not mean you have to test is, as not all conformance criteria apply to the same set of people. E.g. conformance criteria on authors in HTML can often not be tested, but they are still rules authors of HTML are expected to follow. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2013 11:52:52 UTC