- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 08:28:13 -0500
- To: www-qa@w3.org
Hi,
Today, Max Froumentin [1], MathML[2] staff contact, asks me about
something interesting.
What should be done to reach conformance when there are deprecated
features in a specification? Should the deprecated features be
implemented because they are in the specifications and the DTD? If
the deprecated features are not implemented can I still claim
conformance?
For the MathML specification, it's quite clear hopefully, but I guess
it's not for some specifications when it occurs.
---------------------------
In MathML 2.0, 7.2.1.2 Deprecated MathML 1.x Features [3]
MathML 2.0 contains a number of MathML 1.x features which are now
deprecated. The following points define what it means for a feature
to be deprecated, and clarify the relation between deprecated
features and MathML 2.0 compliance.
1. In order to be MathML-output-compliant, authoring tools may
not generate MathML markup containing deprecated features.
2. In order to be MathML-input-compliant, rendering/reading
tools must support deprecated features if they are to be MathML 1.x
compliant. They do not have to support deprecated features to be
considered MathML 2.0 compliant. However, all tools are encouraged to
support the old forms as much as possible.
3. In order to be MathML-roundtrip-compliant, a processor need
only preserve MathML equivalence on expressions containing no
deprecated features.
------------------------------
[1] http://www.w3.org/People/maxf
[2] http://www.w3.org/Math/
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/chapter7.html#interf_deprec
--
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
http://www.w3.org/QA/
--- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 08:31:28 UTC