[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Granularity (Was: New list of discretionary items)
DM>I think that yes/no is too much to hope for. It would be very nice DM>if we could get the answers down to a range of keywords. DM>Conceptually, this would be like "What languages do you support for DM>sorting?". GKH>However, can we not scope our *first* version of the test suite to GKH>be as simple as possible, perhaps even deferring cultural sort GKH>schemes? We could start with a yes/no question: Do you sort "en-US" alphabet? However, I am seeking consensus on the point that we will not be able to represent all aspects of developer discretion with just yes/no or similar binary (ignore/error) values. Let's try a different item: the output of namespace declarations. The developer may choose to (1) output a declaration on every node where that namespace is in scope (gasp), (2) output a declaration in a minimalist way on the "highest" node for which it's in scope, or (3) output a declaration whenever it is stimulated to do so, possibly resulting in duplicate declarations on a node when its ancestor already has the same declaration. Other less deterministic outputs would also conform. I think that we could represent this as one question with multiple keywords and capture the behavior better than two or more binary questions. In my next message: tagging the specs. .................David Marston
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC