OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

conformance message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: RE: [conformance] Minutes of 15 Feb 2002, Telconference


At 06:53 PM 2/20/02 -0500, Lynne Rosenthal wrote:
[...]
Has anyone yet recorded a definition, exactly what we mean by "deprecated feature".  Is it still legal but discouraged?  Does it pertain only to MUST features?  Or also to SHOULD features and MAY features?  (Can you deprecate a MUST NOT assertion?) 
[Lynne Rosenthal] No. this wasn't specifically discussed.  However, a definition is needed and will be provided.  the pertinence to MUST, SHOULD, MAY is a conformance impliciation and not necessarily part of the definition.

That's probably true.  Until we make the definition, I wasn't sure whether or not it might have some dependency on the level of normative language.
[...]
I think it would be useful to make a precise definition of "backward compatibility", particularly if it is going to be used in an issue statement.  Having missed the teleconference, I'm not sure what is being discussed.  Here are a couple of possibilities that come to mind:

[Lynne Rosenthal] Again, agree.  A definition of what is meant by backward compatiability would be good.  I'm not sure how precise it will be considering there may be different flavors depending on the type of specification.

Maybe the Glossary isn't the right place for such detail (or maybe it is).  But if it does turn out that different flavors need to be addressed separately in order to be precise, then we should certainly do that.  Perhaps in an "extended definition" somewhere.  I have suspected for some time that a lot of argumentation happens because the participants have different flavors in mind as they argue their viewpoints, and their base premises (implicit flavors) are never clarified or made explicit. 

As you further noted, this is a live topic on the W3C QA WG issues list, and I think we have an opportunity for mutual progress and benefit here.

-Lofton.

*******************
Lofton Henderson
1919 Fourteenth St., #604
Boulder, CO   80302

Phone:  303-449-8728
Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
*******************



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC