- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 15:55:50 -0600
- To: www-qa@w3.org
- Cc: ij@w3.org
A correction/observation of something I wrote earlier, and a QUESTION (to Alt.1 proponents)... At the root of this thread [1], I wrote: >** Observation. UAAG10 is almost AAA-conformant, but will fail CP13.1 [4] >as written and so would not be A-conformant (UAAG10 fits Alt.3 pretty >well). [...] My statement is actually wrong, because: 1.) UAAG10 does make some use of the RFC keywords, and describes that in its Conformance clause (see last pgph at [3]). and, in addition, 2.) the UAAG10 Conformance clause identifies its imperative-voice statements as normative text (SpecGL CP13.2), 3.) and describes their equivalence to MUST (or rather, "must" lower-case). And ... CP13.1 currently says: "Conformance requirements: the specification MUST use RFC 2119 keywords to denote whether or not requirements are mandatory, optional, or suggested." Therefore, IMO... UAAG10 passes CP13.1 as written, because there is no concept of "all" in CP13.1's conformance requirements. (Which is why Susan raised the LC-67.1 question in the first place!) UAAG10 would fail CP13.1 under alternative #1 at the root of this thread [1]. Btw, there is a sample of UAAG10 text at [2], that illustrates the various conformance-specifying styles together in one checkpoint. QUESTION (to proponents of Alt.1 at [1]): how would you rewrite CP13.1 to embody the concept of "all" in its requirements? I.e., what would you propose for alternative text for ConfReq (and possibly Rationale, and possibly a new "Discussion")? (IMO, the statement of the CP itself, being its non-normative title, is nicely brief and probably okay as is; or could be revised also). Regards, -Lofton. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Jun/0031.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/guidelines.html#tech-configure-text-scale#tech-configure-text-scale [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/conformance.html#Conformance [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#Ck-use-keywords
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 17:55:43 UTC