- From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
- Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:53:28 -0400
- To: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
More suggestions. Replace 'level' with 'type' since we advocate level as a hierarchical functional level. At 04:56 AM 8/3/2004, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote: >Principle: Explain which conformance requirements are mandatory, which >are suggested and which are optional > >What does this mean? >Depending on the way you specify the conformance requirements, it may or >may not be clear if an implementation needs to implement all of them or >only part of them. Try and make sure one can easily distinguish the >level of requirements they have. > >Why care? >If implementors don't have the same understanding of what's required, >interoperability is likely to suffer in the end. > >Techniques >* use RFC Keyword (see Pcp 1) >* group the requirements of same level in subdivision of the technology >(see section @@@) >For instance, HTTP 1.1 defines two level of conformance, one where all >the MUST are respected, and one where all the MUST and the SHOULD are >implemented. >-- --lynne
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 08:53:35 UTC