W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > November 2010

[Bug 11324] Warning in /TR documents

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:25:25 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PJs7p-0005gY-W1@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11324

Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com

--- Comment #3 from Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> 2010-11-20 18:25:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)

Hi Mike,

> nobody as yes has expressed any strong objections to that wording.

I expressed a concern and made a suggestion. It was ignored.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Oct/0466.html

The W3C communications staff's verbiage would alleviate that problem with the
original wording. 

> It's not clear how that is any improvement over the text that is already in the
> warning and that has already been discussed on the public-html list. That text
> is this:
> [[
> This is a work in progress! 
> 
> For the latest updates from the HTML WG, possibly including important bug
> fixes, please look at the <a>editor's draft</a> instead.
> ]]
>

The editor's draft isn't necessarily the "latest updates from the HTML WG". It
is the latest updates from the editor.

(In reply to comment #2)

Hi Philippe,

> IMO, the current wording doesn't reflect enough the fact that what is in the
> editor does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the group, thus the mention of "experiments" in the proposed wording.

I agree. W3C communications staff's verbiage is a simple and honest statement.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 20 November 2010 18:25:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 20 November 2010 18:25:28 GMT