- From: Patrick Curran <Patrick.Curran@sun.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:47:33 -0800
- CC: www-qa-wg@w3.org
I strongly agree. Here in Java-land I've been struggling with some specs that are full of "pluggability" and "optionality". This makes them very attractive from the developer's perspective (lots of room for creativity) and a complete nightmare from the perspectives of conformance and interoperability. An alternative title (only slightly tongue-in-cheeck): "MUST is good, MAY is bad" Lofton Henderson wrote: > > High on my list of things to call to attention is: > > ** Give careful consideration to interoperability implications of > extensions, optionality, and discretionary features. > > A shorter title for this items would be better. How about "Avoid > extensibility and unnecessary variability" > > This could perhaps replace or be integrated with #6, if we think the > list becomes too long by adding more items.) > > Regards, > -Lofton. >
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 00:48:41 UTC