Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] "Strictly conforming" is not related to "interoperable"

["Sam Johnston" <samj@samj.net>]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:

2008/6/16 Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>:

> The key thing with extensions is that if the spec allows for a feature then
> the output should be conformant (for that feature) rather than expressed as
> an extension, unless there is good reason to stray.
>
> A simple, quantitative metric that could potentially be applied is the ratio
> of in-spec to out-of-spec content (where implementations are punished for
> [ab]using extensions), but then there are questions as to whether you cound
> #directives, #bytes, etc.

Isn't that a judgement rather than a test Sam?
x:y is good, anything less is bad?

It is one of many metrics that could be used to form a judgement (albeit a subjective one more suited to an 'informal' test like an acid test).

What's the pass fail test?

If an in-spec action results in unjustified out-of-spec directives you fail (unless the correct in-spec directives are also present).

Sam