Re: [SpecGL Draft] A.2 Provide the wording for conformance claims.

Le jeu 05/08/2004 à 21:31, Karl Dubost a écrit :
> Principle:
>  Provide the wording for conformance claims.

We decided this should be a GP during our F2F, FWIW:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jun/0044.html

> Why should I care?
>  Having a more or less uniform way of claiming conformance for 

s/more or less//

> particular usage of the technology will avoid confusion of people who 
> are interested by such claims. It can happen in many different context 

contexts

> which can be legal for policies and laws, or commercial when selling a 
> product.
> 
>
> Techniques:
> 
> 1. Identify all variabilities of the specification: class of products, 
> modules, profiles, levels, extensions.

I don't think this is needed to provide a conformance claim; you need to
know what's your conformance model is, and what conformance labels
you'll be using though.

> 2. Give all information identifying uniquely the specification: name, 
> versioning, date.
> 3. Write the wording of your conformance claims including this 
> information:
>  •  the specification name,
>  •  the specification version,
>  •  the degree of conformance satisfied,

s/degree of conformance/conformance label/

>  •  information about the subject which is claiming conformance,

Spec authors can't do that, since that's only relevant for people
actually claiming conformance to the spec; I guess this should be
reworded to say that the conformance claim should have a placeholder to
include information about the subject of conformance.

>  •  the date of the claim.

(idem)

> 4. The specification should require that conformance claims contain at 
> least this information.
> 
> Examples
>  [Ed note. WAI specs have some good  examples.]

Dom
-- 
Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/ERCIM
mailto:dom@w3.org