- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:29:50 +0000 (UTC)
- To: John Kemp <john.kemp@nokia.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008, John Kemp wrote: > > OK, that sounds as if the processing requirements for each conformance > class could be in one (or more) separate documents from the language > syntax specification. Well, some of the conformance classes need the language syntax requirements. For example, a WYSIWYG editor would need to know both the syntax and vocabulary conformacne requirments, to output valid documents, as well as the parsing and rendering requirements, to show the right output. Similarly, a conformance checker's implementation requirements are a combination of both the language conformance rules and some separate implementation conformance rules (e.g. the parsing rules). Would having one or more "views" of a single specification work for you? That is, having the HTML5 spec be what it is now, but having ways to filter out the parts that aren't appropriate? We could, for instance, have a set of checkboxes at the start of the document that allow the reader to say which parts they want to see -- just the vocabulary, just the scripting APIs, all the requirments that apply to non-script UAs, etc. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 03:30:29 UTC