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

Re: author view of HTML 5 spec - static copy (2nd try)

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:34:07 +0200
Message-ID: <4A96A76F.103@opera.com>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
CC: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:54:45 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
>>>  Is there any chance we can keep the numbers
>>> in sync between the two copies?
>> The easiest thing I can think of is: for each section that
>> gets filtered out, keep a stub that's just a heading
>> and some sort of note a la "for details, see the full spec".
> Maybe it's possible to first generate the section numbers and the ToC, 
> then cut out the .impl parts (in the ToC too), then generate xrefs. This 
> would get rid of broken links, too.

This is possible but it would be really confusing to users to have 
non-sequential section numbers. Although it is worse for us, I think I 
prefer the situation where the section numbers in the author view and 
the full spec don't match. This makes pinpointing feedback harder (but 
not too hard since a reporter can always give the section title and some 
context), but makes the document read more consistently. Failing that I 
think having stub sections that just say {section relevant only to 
implementors} would be alright.
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 15:33:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:50 UTC