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

Re: ACTION-95, ISSUE-65: Plan to publish a new WD of HTML-5

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:40:31 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20090128123350.04e01088@mail.muzmo.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>,Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>,HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

At 06:25 PM 1/28/2009 +0100, Håkon Wium Lie wrote:

>Also sprach Murray Maloney:
>
>  > Having to keep two documents synchrounously correct is certainly
>  > going to require some QA effort, but that will also yield a quality 
> product.
>
>If this is a sure way to author quality specifications, why aren't all
>specifications written this way?

Maybe I missed something, but I don't think that anybody on this list
has made the suggestion that forms the premise of your question.

I think that I did note elsewhen that man pages for libraries and functions
are not part of the C or C++ specifications, and I will also note that
there are many different instances of man pages for identical functions
(many of which use DocBook as their source)


>Personally, I don't think any amount of QA effort can keep two
>different documents describing the same matter from being in conflict
>with each other.

That is useful input. My opinion, based on many years writing, editing
and publishing technical documentation is at variance with yours.
Luckily, we can test which of our opinions is correct when the job is done.
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 17:40:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:28 GMT