W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > March 2017

Re: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:09:48 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fo6WB+jMMJkTcWWNeLcpRdJBx=+GTtinBGPWas_fuxgQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Cc: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>, "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
wrote:

> > ...
> > there is possible harm in failing to give notice of such a change and
> then implement the change, which may cause some surprise.
>
> What harm are you envisaging exactly, caused by this surprise?
>

I should think it is obvious. Readers may:

   - erroneously conclude that 1.0.1 signals a non-substantive, editorial
   only fix
   - start promulgating usage of a mislabelled version
   - prematurely create what would become legacy references to the wrong
   version number

Shall I go on?



>
>
>
> * From:* Glenn Adams [glenn@skynav.com]
> *Sent:* 15 March 2017 20:11
> *To:* Nigel Megitt
> *Cc:* Pierre-Anthony Lemieux; public-tt@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> It seems relatively pain free to remove the word "minor"; I would also
>> support adding a reference to a change history or diff relative to IMSC1 to
>> clarify exactly what the differences are.
>>
>> We agreed to take the version numbering issue up again at CR; given that
>> deferral, I do not believe we need to forewarn the world of a potential
>> change we may make in the future to the name/version number. Rather, if we
>> do end up making a change to the version number in a future transition
>> stage of the document then we should back-reference to the previously used
>> name and version number instead so the history is clear.
>>
>
> It is important, IMO, to communicate potentially important changes that
> may occur in the SoTD. It reduces the surprise factor. There is no harm in
> saying the version may change and have it not change at CR; while there is
> possible harm in failing to give notice of such a change and then implement
> the change, which may cause some surprise.
>
>
>>
>> We already agreed to communicate the potential change to the name and
>> number in the liaison text that will be sent to initiate the wide review
>> and I do not believe we need to do any more at this stage.
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Glenn Adams [glenn@skynav.com]
>> *Sent:* 15 March 2017 00:57
>> *To:* Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
>> *Cc:* public-tt@w3.org
>> *Subject:* Re: IMSC 1.0.1 WD for WR
>>
>> Please add text to the SoTD that the version and/or title may be changed
>> prior to CR. In addition, please remove the word "minor" from "minor
>> revision" in the SoTD, as that calls for a judgment about which we do not
>> have consensus.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Good morning/evening,
>>>
>>> Please find at [1] at candidate IMSC 1.0.1 WD for wide review.
>>>
>>> [1] https://rawgit.com/w3c/imsc/WR-imsc-1.0.1/imsc1/spec/ttml-ww
>>> -profiles.html
>>>
>>> I have set the publication date to 21 March 2017 tentatively.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> -- Pierre
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 15 March 2017 21:10:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:39 UTC