- From: Cem Karan <Cem.Karan@usa.alcatel.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 16:38:11 -0500
- To: "www-talk@w3.org" <www-talk@w3.org>, www-dom@w3.org
Forgive me for cross posting this, but I'm not too sure how much traffic either of these lists gets these days. I've been noticing that the documents written under the W3C auspices seem to have a wide range of writing styles. This can be a barrier to comprehension. Most documents contain certain semantics that are common to all, but the syntax to represent the semantics is different. I would like to suggest that a simple syntax be written up that writers of documents can use to represent the meaning of their documents in a clean, standard way; something like http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-notation and http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-terminology combined, possibly with other additions as well. I'm proposing this because of a few problems that I have had in understanding some of the specifications; their meanings were unclear enough that without outside help I would have written code that was disastrously out of spec. The RFC series had this problem for a time but have corrected this by publishing documents on how to publish documents ( ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc2223.txt , http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2234.html among others) which to a large degree corrected this problem. Although their specifications appear to me to be somewhat out of date (you are required to submit documents in plain ASCII text, among other problems), if we had something like this, it would help a great deal determining the meaning of some of the specifications that have been and will be written. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration, Cem Karan
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2001 16:38:18 UTC