- From: <david_marston@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 23:56:10 -0400
- To: www-qa@w3.org
I proposed a new SpecGL CP8.4 that would say: Promote consistency across multiple discretionary items. Now, Lofton Henderson asks: LH>About the proposed rewrite of CP8.4: LH>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Apr/0030.html LH>Previously, it was about "discretionary choices", and purposely -- LH>we had particular "choice" scenarios in mind. Now it is about LH>"discretionary items" (choices, plus optionality, plus LH>impl-dependent behaviors). I think there was confusion about wording consistency vs. policy consistency. The full proposal (cited above) pushes the wording consistency requirements into other checkpoints. Thus, the overhaul makes 8.4 pertain to policy consistency only. As I was drafting the rationale and other supporting verbiage, I didn't come up with any good reason to limit it to choices. For example, if the WG decides that conforming products have wide-open discretion to choose which natural languages to support, and which character sets to support, then they have a general policy about not restricting languages. They can then state the general policy and make it a point to hold to that policy where more detailed discretion (choice or other) will apply, such as character sets for numbers, xml:lang attributes, collation routines, etc. .................David Marston
Received on Sunday, 4 May 2003 23:56:58 UTC