Re: SpecLite: extensions

The definition for Extension is the one that is in SpecGL.  Are you (and 
Karl) proposing to change that definition?  If so, the WG should discuss this.


At 01:50 PM 4/24/2004 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>Catching up on non-QAH business, I have some comments.  Here is the first...
>At 10:15 AM 4/14/2004 -0400, Lynne Rosenthal wrote:
>>The following is an expansion of text for the Extension section of 
>>GLOSSARY Definitions:
>>Extension:  The ability to incorporate functionality beyond what is 
>>defined in the specification.   The ability to extend or enhance the 
>>Extensible:  The ability of a specification to accept extensions in a 
>>define way.  A specification is extensible if it provides a mechanism for 
>>any party to create extensions
>>Strict Conformance: conformance of an implementation that employs only 
>>the requirements and/or functionality defined in the specification and no 
>>more (i.e., no extensions to the specification are implemented).
>I think the definition of extension is wrong here (also on the Wiki) -- it 
>actually reads like a variation on the definition of 
>"extensibility".  Here is what Karl wrote [1], which I like:
>* Extensibility is the ability of a technology to accept extensions in
>a defined way. If the extensibility mechanism is not defined, the
>technology is not extensible.
>* Extension is an additional feature to a technology which gives the
>possibility to extend the behaviour of the technology.

Received on Sunday, 25 April 2004 18:42:29 UTC