- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 12:19:01 -0700
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, www-qa-wg@w3.org
Although there are parts of SpecGL that we are still tuning, presence of a conformance section is pretty basic. We are asked to participate in every PR telecon, but by then it is too late. LC is the time to catch such major omissions, but QA is not asked to participate in many LC reviews. Mandatory conformance to SpecGL would solve the problem. So would pro-active LC review, but we don't have a lot of resources to do a thorough review of all LC documents. -Lofton. At 04:33 PM 11/27/02 -0500, Karl Dubost wrote: >On the 4 Recommendations published so far in 2002, > >No one has a conformance section :( > > >XML-Signature XPath Filter 2.0 > 8 November 2002, John Boyer, Merlin Hughes, Joseph Reagle >Exclusive XML Canonicalization Version 1.0 > 18 July 2002, John Boyer, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd, Joseph Reagle >The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.0 (P3P1.0) Specification > 16 April 2002, Massimo Marchiori >XML-Signature Syntax and Processing > 12 February 2002, Donald Eastlake, Joseph Reagle, David Solo > > >-- >Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager > http://www.w3.org/QA/ > > --- Be Strict To Be Cool! --- >
Received on Friday, 29 November 2002 14:18:03 UTC