W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: WG comments, Working Drafts, and Last Call -- clarification please?

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:17:34 -0400
Message-ID: <4A7B2C4E.6060701@intertwingly.net>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Shelley Powers wrote:
>>> If someone publishes a Working Draft with many differences, can we
>>> discuss each, or is it a case of all or nothing?
>> I don't understand the question.
> 
> Sorry, I wasn't very clear.
> 
> Let's say an alternative draft changes how summary is handled, the
> microdata section, and various other pieces of the Editor's draft. I'm
> assuming we could propose the entire new draft, but we could also
> propose each section, by itself. One document, multiple proposals.
> Does that sound about right to folks?

I'm still not following.  Propose as what?  Perhaps I have been confused 
because what we have in front of us is a proposal to publish a Working 
Draft.

Meanwhile, we have people working on Issue 32.  They aren't looking to 
rewrite the entire document.  I'll note that the early drafts I have 
seen made by a number of members of the PFWG on how they would like to 
see summary handled involve coordinated changes to a number of different 
sections.

I guess it comes down to what the meaning of "proposal" is.  Ultimately, 
I see it as a set of diffs when applied to a document produces a new 
document.  Such diffs need not be constrained by section boundaries.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 19:18:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:06 UTC