- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:38:55 -0700
- To: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
- Cc: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com> wrote: >>As I pointed out this was one possible solution, not the only solution. >>Also without a clause stating that author requirements are not to be >>included in testing I MUST test them if they contain text pertaining to >>RFC 2119. There is no question about that from a testing perspective, and >>it¹s the rule we have always followed. > > Actually, I think this very much ought to be questioned from any kind of > perspective. Maybe we ought to expand a little on overly simplistic rules > instead of blindly applying them. Also, what's the "we" you're referring to, Arron? It can't be the WG, so I assume it's "the group I work in at MS". If you'd just told me this was about box-checking on a badly-written task list, I wouldn't have argued as much. Problems that can be solved by boilerplate were never problems in the first place. ^_^ ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 18:39:43 UTC