Re: Testable assertion tagging for W3C specifications


this comment is not so close to the topic testability.

Itīs a good suggestion so far, and it would make for example 
translation work much easier as a side-effect.

But all Editors have to go to school again to speak the "language" 
you will choose.

There was made a good approach, using the xmlspec21.dtd (and the 
xmlspecD0.xsl) to provide a format, that gives some rules on the way 
to make specs very similar in syntax. With an xmlspecD0.xsl, that is 
changed into the demands of a certain language, you can simplify 
translation work and provide equal terms in different specs or their 

But how many people/editors use the xmlspecXX.dtd or even have heard 
about it or like to learn how to handle it? Just look at the specs, 
that are very close to the XML spec. Infoset, Signature, SVG ...

It would be useful to write the document below in XML, too. 
> for the latest

Just wanted to make clear, that it will be not so easy to follow such 
rules. Editors have to do much work that is more important , if only 
in their eyes or really is not my thing to judge.

Happy working so far!

PS, maybe we can go on with this discussion in one group, letīs say

Stefan Schumacher
Oesterberg 20                                   0172/2718968
58553 Halver                                    02353/130119

Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 18:02:22 UTC