- From: <scott_boag@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 14:20:13 -0400
- To: david_marston@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
David Marston wrote: > Based on Alex Rousskov's latest description, I surmise that he is > proposing: > > 1. Spec authors take no special action. I don't think that's what he was proposing in his last note. He stated: > I suggest that both good markup DTDs (or schemas or > whatever is the right word to use today) are proposed AND that good > addressing techniques are also proposed. So Alex and I both agree on this. 'tis good. He also states that: > > But it would be nice > > if a well thought out scheme could be designed and experimented > > with, and, if it works, evolved over the coming years. > > I agree, as long as QAWG can keep "QA Tool Collection" 100% optional. Which leaves what spec authors do as a matter of education, and the resulting appetite or non-appetite will decide if special testable assertion markup gets included. It means the designers of this mechanism must sell it, and the consumer must like it and want it. A reasonable and good process. -scott
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 14:30:06 UTC