- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 15:32:26 -0500
- To: 'www-qa-wg@w3.org' <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 22:53:47 UTC
AI-20050131-7 (KD) to propose a "good practice" on the issue of formal/prose language normativity, 2005-02-07 http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#formal-language Do we really need a new "good practice"? I thought it was more a technique. There's a technique which already answer that. [[[ To avoid discrepancies between the English prose and the formal language, set up a process so that a given section is bound to a given part of the formal language, and one can't modified without the other. ]]] We can add Be sure that both prose and formal languages are synchronized. You might try to implement the feature by following only the formal language, then try to implement a second time by following only the prose, and finally make a consistency checking. -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 22:53:47 UTC