- From: Andrew Thackrah <andrew@opengroup.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:45:46 +0100
- To: www-qa@w3.org
My take on DoV I think the role of SpecGL should be to advise the author that DoV is something that they should be thinking about when writing a spec. We can include examples of things like levels, profiles etc to illustrate what we mean. However, since it seems from QAWG discussion that there are differences of opinion on our definition of p/m/l then I don't think we are in a position to impose a rigid definition on others. Better to say "consider the possibility of using some kind of DoV structure, look at these specs for examples of good practice. If it suits your technology, create a DoV architecture. It doesn't matter if your DoV does not conform to someone elses definition of a profile or whatever - all you have to do is document your chosen system and if you have more than one DoV then document the relationship between them." So I think in SpecGL all DoVs should be under one Guideline. We should mention p/m/l as examples but not be prescriptive about them. After all, we are encouraging people to think about the design of their technology, not trying to shoehorn them into the design of someone elses technology. -Andrew
Received on Monday, 28 April 2003 09:46:36 UTC