- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:42:13 -0400
- To: www-qa@w3.org
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Dear Ian, Thanks for your comments on the Last Call version of the QA Framework: Specification Guidelines[0] - 22 November 2004 After two weeks from now (on May 18, 2005), the lack of answer will be considered as if you had accepted the comment. Original comment (issue 1044 [1]) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Jan/0009.html Thank you for your comment, which the QA Working Group has accepted. We have reworded the affected section as you recommended and it now reads [2] Requirement 07: Use a consistent style for conformance requirements and explain how to distinguish them. “What does it mean? Specifications use different styles to convey conformance requirements: RFC 2119 [RFC2119] keywords, imperative voice, descriptive assertions, etc. Tell the readers what styles are used, especially when the specification uses different styles for different parts of the specification. Why care? It is important for readers to be able to differentiate requirements in the specification from non-requirements in order to either implement or review them. Techniques Using RFC 2119 [RFC2119] Keywords (MUST, SHOULD, MAY, ...) makes it easy to spot conformance requirements. According to the RFC itself, they should be used only to establish interoperation [WIKI-RFC- KEYWORDS]. They are usually written with distinctive formatting, such as upper case or bold. It is a good idea to create a specific markup for them too. It will be easier to extract conformance requirements and better for accessibility (See The Manual of Style: RFC 2119 Key Words [MANUAL-STYLE]).” [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/ [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1044 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#consistent- style-principle -- Karl Dubost QA Working Group Chair http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 15:42:24 UTC