W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Discrepancies in published drafts

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:11:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDBFJA_Mc3vrCu+1MiShm3uiq87Ggje=-NwE2x7UWR0FCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-html@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> 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?

I don't see anything missing from the single-page Editor's Draft.
Could you provide exact URLs to the problematic versions?

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 01:11:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:36 GMT