Re: Errata for Touch Events REC

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The errata for the Touch Events REC [1] is still mostly empty and it
> contains what I would characterize as a somewhat surprising statement:
>
> [[
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-touch-events-20131010/REC-
> touch-events-20131010-errata.html>
> ...
>
> An updated specification will be located at WebPlatform Specs.
> ]]
>
> I say "surprising" because I don't recall us agreeing to publish an update
> at specs.webplatform.org. Would someone please clarify?
>

IIRC Doug said that was the new preferred path for publishing errata the
last time we discussed the errata process on a call.  Perhaps "updated
specification" is misleading though :-)

Anyhow, what, if anything should be added to the errata document? Does the
> CG have consensus about text for the errata document? Alternatively,
> perhaps the errata document could link to a version of the spec that is the
> REC + agreed errata text (all inlined, and perhaps styled such all of the
> changes from the REC are very clearly identifiable and enumerated in the
> Changes Since last Pub section)?


> Personally, I think having a document that is the REC + agreed errata
> changes is more useful than adding text to the errata document.
>

I like that plan too.  From our recent call though it sounds like some of
the 'errata' changes we've made may need to be considered normative.  Eg.
fractional co-ordinates.  That one change alone is important enough to me
(and, IMHO, the platform) that I wouldn't want to let it fall through the
cracks.  So perhaps we should be talking more about publishing a minor v1.1
update instead of worrying about errata?


> -ArtB
>
>
>
>