Re: Testable assertion tagging for W3C specifications

At 20:49 +0200 2002-05-06, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>The problem I see here, is that in fact only a very small number of
>technical reports are written uisng the xmlspec document type. Maybe
>it'd be a better idea to have some informal XHTML classes for this
>purpose, if that's not anyway the ides. This would be way easier to
>adopt by Working Groups and users of technical reports also have
>access to this information.

We can do both. We can have a tag for xmlspec and also a class for HTML spec.
class="ta" for example.

I remember that Max Froumentin, some months ago were talking about a 
possibility of creating an XSLT file to transform an HTML Rec as a 
compatible XMLspec compatible files, *if the HTML one is written with 
good classes*.
Some people don't want to use an XML editor or can't. But if we can 
create a set of classes equivalent to xmlspec, we could have a kind 
of two-way HTML<->xmlspec.

Testable assertions should be included in xmlspec prod at least and 
we can imagine a class for HTML files. Another good thing about that, 
it could help people who wants to rewrite a version of a spec in a 
testable way. The copyright of the specifications makes it possible.
	People are already doing translation of spec 
( with these conditions
	or the excellent Annotated version of the XML spec:

Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---

Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 17:37:49 UTC