- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:59:03 +0200
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1091782742.1416.2430.camel@stratustier>
Hello Karl, Le mar 03/08/2004 à 22:21, Karl Dubost a écrit : > Example: > @@Is there a place with a conformance model explained@@ I think the diagram you produced for the Profile/module/level could be leveraged to explain the conformance models of a few specs, with various degrees of complexity; e.g.: - XML 1.0 has 2 classes of products (document and processor), each of those have 2 conformance degrees (well-formed/valid and validating/non-validating); we could add xml:base, xml namespaces and xlink as "modules" for xml even though they haven't really be defined as such - on the other hand, SVG 1.1 has roughly 4 classes of product (markup fragments with various extents, generators, interpreters and viewers) http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-SVG11-20030114/conform.html Some of these classes of product have various degrees of conformance (e.g. static / dynamic for interpreters, static/dynamic * high-quality for viewers); SVG 1.1 also defines modules, which are grouped into profiles (tiny/mobile/full); having a nice diagram summarizing it would be both interesting and instructive as to how complex a conformance model can get once you start playing with DoV. Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Friday, 6 August 2004 05:02:36 UTC