- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 17:39:36 -0500
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/2/11 4:52 PM, Anton Prowse wrote: > Indeed, but I guess it's precisely the "testing" angle that's > interesting; the (largely philosophical) question is whether the failure > of an implementation to implement /untestable/ requirements has a > bearing on whether it is regarded as compliant. Common sense would > dictate that it doesn't, of course, but... Untestable requirements really make no sense... since you couldn't tell whether an implementation is fulfilling them or not! -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2011 22:40:39 UTC