- From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 13:26:07 -0400
- To: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
I agree and was thinking along those same lines - putting something in the Intro. At 12:29 PM 4/13/2004, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote: >Le mar 13/04/2004 à 18:07, Lofton Henderson a écrit : > > >4. Conformance > > >Do we really need this section. I suggest removing it. It adds nothing > > >and may set a bad precedent. Since this is a Handbook, we don't violate > > >our own rule of having a conformance section in every specification. > > > > I was debating this. On the one hand, we say "Every W3C TR should have a > > Conformance section". Are we vulnerable to criticism if the QAH does > > not? > >Given the type of document QAH is, I think we'd better get rid of the >conformance section ; of course, it doesn't hurt if we say why in the >introduction (but keep it short). > >Dom >-- >Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ >W3C/ERCIM >mailto:dom@w3.org >
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2004 13:27:23 UTC