W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > November 2011

Re: HNTF requirement document ready for publication

From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:13:54 +0100
To: "Kazuyuki Ashimura" <ashimura@w3.org>
Cc: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.v5fvpgyo6ugkrk@giuseppep-x220>
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 22:05:59 +0100, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>  
wrote:

> Hi Giuseppe,
>
Hi Kaz,

> Thanks a lot for generating this HTML version of the requirements
> document!
>
> I have several meta comments.
>
> 1. Review deadline
> -------------------
>
> We usually give one week to group participants for review.  So maybe
> it would be better to accept comments until Nov. 30, etc., wouldn't
> it?
>
this time changes are minor, mostly editorial, so the deadline is fine.

> 2. Authors
> -----------
>
> I think we should list the names of HNTF participants who contributed
> to this document as "Author" right below "Editor" :)
>
yep good idea, I'll add it.

> 3. Checkers & Guidelines
> -------------------------
>
> We need to check the document using several checkers, e.g., the
> Pubrules checker [1], before the publication.  Most of the errors
> currently pointed out by the checkers are editorial and minor, but I
> think we need to clarify the following:
>
note that the version that will be used for publication is not the one you  
see but the one I'll generate after that pressing ctrl+alt+shift+s. I  
think that version is already pubrules compliant.

/g

> - Currently HTML5 is used as the DOCTYPE, but it mght be better to use
>    a stable version of HTML, e.g., HTML 4.01, for an IG Note at this
>    moment.  Please note that even the HTML5 spec [2] uses HTML 4.01 :)
>
> - Every marked-up section and subsection of the document MUST have a
>    target anchor.  So we have to add "id" attributes to all the heading
>    elements.  Could you please add them?
>
> Also please note that there is the "Manual of Style" guideline which
> contains best practices on document style.  For example, it recommends
> we should use a specific style for RFC2119 keywords as follows:
> [[
> When these key words are used in the RFC sense, make them UPPERCASE,
> enclose them in the em element, and style them with CSS to make the
> UPPERCASE readable.
>
> <em title="MUST in RFC 2119 context"
>         class="RFC2119">MUST</em>
>
> .RFC2119 {
>    text-transform: lowercase;
>    font-style: italic;
> }
> ]]
>
> Francois and myself are happy to help you modify the document based on
> the checkers and the guideline if needed.
>
> [1] Pubrules checker:
> http://services.w3.org/xslt?xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fservices.w3.org%2Ftidy%2Ftidy%3FpassThroughXHTML%3D1%26docAddr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fdvcs.w3.org%252Fhg%252Fwebtv%252Fraw-file%252Fed956fac0f9c%252Fhnreq%252Fhnreq.html&xslfile=http%3A%2F%2Fservices.w3.org%2Fxslt%3Fxmlfile%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2F07%2Fpubrules%253Fuimode%253Dchecker_full%2526year%253D2010%2526docstatus%253Dfpig-note-tr%2526rectrack%253Dno%2526prevrec%253Ddoesnotapply%2526patpol%253Dw3c%2526normative%253Ddoesnotapply%2526uri%253Dhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fdvcs.w3.org%25252Fhg%25252Fwebtv%25252Fraw-file%25252Fed956fac0f9c%25252Fhnreq%25252Fhnreq.html%2526filterValues%253Dform%2526nscheckmanual%253D%2526display%253Dall%2526recursive%253Doff%2526recurse_auth%253Don%26xslfile%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2005%2F09%2Fchecker%2Fframe.xsl%26display%3Dall%26recurse_auth%3Don&uimode=checker_full&filterValues=form&year=2010&docstatus=fpig-note-tr&rectrack=no&prevrec=doesnotapply&patpol=w3c&normative=doesnotapply!
 &do
> c_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdvcs.w3.org%2Fhg%2Fwebtv%2Fraw-file%2Fed956fac0f9c%2Fhnreq%2Fhnreq.html&recursive=off&nscheckmanual=&display=all&recurse_auth=on
>
> [2] Manual of Style: http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#References
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kazuyuki
>
>
> On 11/24/2011 01:04 AM, Giuseppe Pascale wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> the hntf requirement document is ready for publication as a group note.
>>
>> While turning it into a proper W3C document together with Francois  
>> (thanks for the help!),
>> we did some small changes, fixed some typos and few other things that  
>> didn't look right.
>>
>> So I would like to give the group the opportunity to check such changes.
>> The latest version of the document is available here:
>> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webtv/raw-file/ed956fac0f9c/hnreq/hnreq.html
>>
>> A diff version with some changes highlighted is available here:
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fdvcs.w3.org%2Fhg%2Fwebtv%2Fraw-file%2F4831cdba407b%2Fhnreq%2Fhnreq.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fdvcs.w3.org%2Fhg%2Fwebtv%2Fraw-file%2Fed956fac0f9c%2Fhnreq%2Fhnreq.html
>>
>> The diff does not show all changes, in particular other changes applied  
>> to the document are:
>> 1. a dependency in U4 that doesn't exist anymore was dropped.
>> 2. a reference to UPnP Precision Time Synchronization in U13 was moved  
>> back to the v3 since I couldn't find a v4 of AV transport spec that  
>> could be linked directly.
>> 3. the abstract is now limited to its last paragraph.
>> 4. Updated the Status of This Document section, both boilerplate and  
>> non boilerplate parts.
>> 5. RFC 2119 words highlighted.
>> 6. adapted the format for some of the use cases, not to go too deep in  
>> nested lists.
>>
>> Deadline for comments is end of Monday next week (28th). We aim to  
>> publish it on the 1st of December and share it with the DAP group for  
>> comments after that.
>>
>> /g
>>
>>
>


-- 
Giuseppe Pascale
TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2011 07:14:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 November 2011 07:14:34 GMT