- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:03:13 -0400
- To: public-html@w3.org
I received a question today from a colleague who's reviewing the Last Call. It seemed useful to bring that question here. He writes: "I note that starting with the "Working Draft 25 May 2011" (http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/), taking the link to "single page HTML" format goes to "Editor's Draft 15 July 2011", and the Overview (single page HTML) version of that seems to lack all of section 3 and most of section 4, etc. "Is it safe to use the single page HTML edition for most tasks, resorting to the multiple page version for content missing from the former, and is it (as I assume) best to be working exclusively from the July 15 Editor's Draft?" I presume any omission is unintentional and will be addressed. However, was it intended to publish newer drafts while the Last Call is still open? Clearly, we've triggered caution in at least one outside reviewer. What's the answer? The public call was issued against the May document. Does it matter? It just doesn't seem tidy to me to have a more recently dated edition linked from the older edition--especially during a Last Call. Is that untidiness the worst of it? Or is there room for confusion in the bug processing end here as well? Janina -- Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org Linux Foundation http://a11y.org Chair, Protocols & Formats Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 01:03:43 UTC