RE: Comments on the WOFF Last Call

Either of these proposed solutions would resolve my comment. I do think it is very nice to have an informative summary with links to the normative text, but do worry about it staying up to date in the future.

Steve Zilles


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Lilley [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 6:44 AM
> To: Stephen Zilles
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Comments on the WOFF Last Call
> 
> On Wednesday, January 5, 2011, 6:35:22 PM, Stephen wrote:
> 
> 
> SZ> 4.       It seems to be a bad practice to have two places where
> SZ> conformance requirements are stated: in the normative text and in
> SZ> the Summary of Conformance Requirements, perhaps one of these
> SZ> should be described as informative and linked to the other.
> 
> We agree and are discussing several ways to resolve this.
> 
> One way, as you say, is to mark the appendix as informative and to link
> each requirement in the appendix to its defining instance in the normative
> prose.
> 
> Another option is to remove the appendix completely, if it adds no real
> value.
> 
> 
> --
>  Chris Lilley   Technical Director, Interaction Domain
>  W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
>  Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
>  Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups