- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 16:13:25 +0100
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1108998805.5996.86.camel@stratustier>
This is the proposed resolution for the issue #1050, titled "Modesty requirement" [1]. ---- The Quality Assurance Working Group believes that such a good practice would be inappropriate for the following reasons: * some of the qualities mentioned in the issue (WAI AAA conformance, conformance to QA Specification Guidelines, and more generally the "conformance to other specifications" aspect) can be legitimately claimed as long as the relevant specifications define a conformance that can apply to specifications or documents - as this is the case for WCAG 1.0 and the Specification Guidelines; a specification claims of conformance to other specifications can be deficient the same way a product can be deficient with regard to its conformance claim, and these deficiencies should be fixed either during the development process or through the errata process * for the other qualities mentioned where objective evaluation criteria are not available (simple, easy, device-independent), it is unclear that this defects affects that many - if any - specifications that it would deserve a good practice in the current version of Specification Guideline; --- Comments/suggestions welcome. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1050 -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Monday, 21 February 2005 15:13:27 UTC