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

Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-101 (us-ascii-ref)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:55:26 +0100
Message-ID: <4B8EE8DE.4040909@gmx.de>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
On 03.03.2010 23:31, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Team,
>
> Please advise.
>
> On Mar 3, 2010, at 12:35 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
>> I assume that W3C has a policy of that all W3C recommendations has to
>> be freely available. Thus I don't think having normative dependencies
>> on non-free specifications could be allowed.
>
> Would it be against W3C policy to have a normative dependency on a
> specification that is not freely available?
> ...

How is that material different from citing ISO-8601 (which HTML5 does)? 
Or citing other specs that have normative reference to specs that aren't 
"freely" available, such as IETF STD 68?

That being said, I would *love* if there was a good "official" online 
reference for ASCII, but as far as I can't tell there isn't (unless we 
decide to like ECMA-006). Citing something else which is online but 
isn't a proper reference in any case is no solution.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 22:56:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:04 GMT