• To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Subject: Re: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
• From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:42:37 -0700
• Cc: Michael Kay <michael.h.kay@n...>,'Michael Champion' <michaelc.champion@g...>,'Liam Quin' <liam@w...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <4173DF6A.7060702@d...>
• References: <20041018144435.BYLN20770.mta10-svc.ntlworld.com@Turtle> <4173DF6A.7060702@d...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

Jonathan Robie wrote:
> A W3C standard can't become a Recommendation without implementations. 
> It's useful to have tests that show what has been correctly implemented, 
> so that we can demonstrate that there really are implementations.

Yes. It would also be useful if those tests were used to develop 
W3C-sanctioned test marks, so the marketplace would have some way to 
tell, except by painful experience, which products actually implement 
the recommendations.

Bob Foster

• References:
  • RE: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
  • Re: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
• Next by Date: RE: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
• Previous by thread: Re: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
• Next by thread: Re: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread