W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2007

Re: minor copy edits needed in HTML 5 draft (control over /TR/html5/ )

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 03:16:04 +0200
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Mike Brown" <mike@skew.org>, "Karl Dubost" <karl@w3.org>
Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tt49s2gywxe0ny@pc052.coreteam.oslo.opera.com>

On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:58:53 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Mike Brown wrote:
>>
>> Actually the request is for the spec's own hyperlink to the latest
>> version not produce an HTTP 404 response, and actually return the latest
>> version of the spec. How that is accomplished is up to you :)
>
> The link in version in the CVS repository that claims to link to the
> latest version can't ever point to the latest version, sadly. This is
> because the W3C's publication rules require the "Latest Version" link to
> point to the /TR/ page without a date, and the /TR/ page is always going
> to be older than the CVS version. (I could change the CVS version so that
> it doesn't match the publication rules, but then it would be a pain for
> all involved every time we published the spec.)

Since editors' drafts are public, we could ask the W3C if they would  
allow, for working drafts, an additional link to the latest editors' draft  
in the TR draft, if that is not in fact allowed by pubrules. I had a  
memory of wanting to do that for ATAG drafts in the last century, but it  
turns out that I put the links in the Status of the Document section - see  
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-AUTOOLS-19990713/#Status_of_this_document  
for an example.

Looking at Pubrules [1] it says:

[[[
Document Identifiers

Document identifier information MUST be presented in a dl list, where each  
dt element marks up an identifier role ("This Version", "Latest Version",  
"Previous Version", etc.) and each dd element includes a link whose link  
text is the identifier.
                                       ^^^-CMN
Document identifier information MUST be present in this order:
   This version URI.
   Latest version URI(s). See also the (non-normative) Version Management  
in W3C Technical Reports for information about "latest version" URI and  
version management.
   Previous version URI
...
]]]

As I read this, after the three required links you could in fact have a  
link to the latest editors' draft in the header section. Dan or Karl can  
you confirm or deny this?

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules?uimode=filter&uri=

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com    Catch up: Speed Dial   http://opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 01:16:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:45 UTC