ISSUE-2: Do we need to formulate a notion of compliance in scope of the cg?

Do we need to formulate a notion of compliance in scope of the cg?

State:
POSTPONED
Product:
Raised by:
Opened on:
2018-09-18
Description:
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. [minutes] 2019-10-15 dpvcg (from bert@w3.org on 2019-10-15)
  2. ACTION-97 (was: ACTION-89) (from axel.polleres@wu.ac.at on 2019-04-22)
  3. [minutes] 2018-09-18 dpvcg (from bert@w3.org on 2018-09-19)
  4. ISSUE-2: Do we need to formulate a notion of compliance in scope of the cg? (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2018-09-18)

Related notes:

related to ISSUE-16

Axel Polleres, 5 Apr 2019, 13:16:27

not related to ISSUE-16 (i.e. ignore the previous note)

Axel Polleres, 5 Apr 2019, 13:18:03

RESOLVED: move issue-2 to postponed issues under the following text: "The group did not concsider defining any notion of (legal) compliance with respect to a particular legislation in scope of the current specification. While we assume that certain violations of compliance could be recorded with the current vocabulary, compliance guarantees or compliance checking algorithms are not part of this specification."

Axel Polleres, 15 Oct 2019, 14:26:54

Display change log ATOM feed


Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@wu.ac.at>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, Harshvardhan J. Pandit <me@harshp.com>, Chairs, Dominique Hazaƫl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: index.php,v 1.326 2018/10/13 17:29:51 vivien Exp $