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

Re: CfC: Adopt ISSUE-101 us-ascii-ref Change Proposal to replace ASCII reference

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 06:20:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4C21DFE1.1080905@intertwingly.net>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
The chairs request that this change proposal be updated to be explicit 
about what change or possible range of changes would be acceptable.  We 
note that Ian has provided input that, if incorporated, would satisfy 
this request.

Note: the original intent behind allowing prose descriptions was for 
global changes that were clear (s/URL/URI/g comes to mind).  In this 
case, we are talking about a specific paragraph, and in particular we 
have indication from the editor that he would interpret this paragraph 
in a specific way, namely no change.  For the purposes of proceeding to 
soliciting objections, it would be much better if the proposal were 
explicit, and given that Ian has indicated how he would interpret this 
change proposal, we see no reason to permit a prose description in this 
case.

- Sam Ruby

On 06/16/2010 02:36 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2010, at 21:31, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On 06/15/2010 02:13 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's a counter-Change Proposal:
>>>
>>> Rationale
>>>
>>> To put spec readers ahead of theoretical purity, spec references
>>> should be followable in a browser without paywalls when feasible. In
>>> the case of ASCII, it is feasible.
>>>
>>> Details
>>>
>>> The reference for ASCII must not be to a document that cannot be
>>> obtained as plain text, HTML or PDF free of charge without a wrapper
>>> format (such as zip) by issuing an HTTP GET request. The reference
>>> should be to any resource, at the editor's discretion, that describes
>>> ASCII and that can be obtained as plain text, HTML or PDF free of
>>> charge without a wrapper format (such as zip) by issuing an HTTP GET
>>> request.
>>
>> The above does not meet the criteria for a change proposal. Specifically[1]:
>>
>> Proposal Details: This may take one of the following four forms:
> [...]
>> * With prior permission from the chairs, a high-level prose
>>    description of the changes to be made.
>
> I request permission to submit the above as 'high-level prose'.
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2010 10:20:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:18 UTC