- 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