ISSUE-126: CR Comment: conformance for markup, a processor, or both?
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/126 Raised by: Ralph Swick On product: RDFa In [1] Noah Mendelsohn writes "I tend to feel that specification of a lanuage and its mapping to things like default graphs is quite a different thing from the specification of a piece of software with certain required outputs. ... "Thus my preference, and its only a preference, would be to see the definition of default graph retained for reference by other specifications, but the definition of processor conformance moved either to a separate document or perhaps to a normative appendix of the syntax and processing document. I think a more appropriate title for such a section might be: "Conformance requirements for general purpose RDFa processors" ..." [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0104.html
