Fwd: Re: QA Framework: Specification Guidelines: Umbrella specification

(forwarded from www-qa)

> We defined it because there's a tendency to publish a technology as a 
> set of specifications, which is not a problem.
> 	The concept of Umbrella specification has been created to stress the 
> obvious (not rocket science) as you said, but which seems not necessary 
> understood by some WGs.
> 
> Then I would prefer to keep it inside the document for at least to be 
> sure that people understand the concept, which is far to be  the case 
> sometimes :)))

FWIW, I kind of agree with Gary that it doesn't make much sense to
define the term if we don't use it at all in SpecGL; in which case it
might be a better fit for ViS, for instance.

(BTW, it may be a bit better to answer to commenters only when the WG
has discussed the comment and agreed on a common position, to avoid
getting them confused as to what our definitive answer is - although
getting discussion on www-qa is also certainly a good way to move
forward)

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