W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: please fix status of File Upload editor's draft

From: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:10:25 -0700
Message-ID: <c9e12660908121610u230dd43n56d13988a96a5312@mail.gmail.com>
To: arun@mozilla.com
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Arun Ranganathan<arun@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Dan Connolly wrote:
>> Looks like the word is getting out about this work;
>> there's a pretty favorable article on ajaxian.
>> http://ajaxian.com/archives/w3c-publish-first-working-draft-of-file-api
>> But it's a little confused...
>> "The W3C has published a working draft for the File API"
>> W3C hasn't actually published it just yet.
>> No wonder they're confused...
>> In http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileUpload/publish/FileAPI.html


Ajaxian should edit that entry to something like: "there is an editors
draft in the making" and then presented the goals/objective of the

Good to get more notice on the API, but saying things like "Arun is a
great guy" in that same entry indicates impartiality.

>> I find
>> "This document is a First Public Working Draft. It is not an official
>> publication of the W3C."
>> That's contradictory. Please take out the 1st sentence or something.
>> It's also labelled "W3C Working Draft 12 August 2009" on the
>> title page.
>> Please delete that subtitle or change it to "editor's draft"
>> or some such. See http://www.w3.org/2005/03/28-editor-style
>> for some concrete suggestions.
> Fixed; I hope the status is clearer now (you may have to force a reload to
> see the changes).
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileUpload/publish/FileAPI.html

I mentioned before that "2006" URI has a link to the latest:
| Latest public version:
|    http://www.w3.org/TR/file-upload/

That page has a previous draft (Robin's?)

That latest version:-
| File Upload
| W3C Working Draft 18 October 2006

AISB, the "2006" uri returns the latest "editors draft" and the
"Latest public version" at "/TR/file-upload/" has old content.

That should be fixed so that the latest version does truly point to
the latest version.

I do not know the rules for how W3C usually publishes things, but it
is confusing to have the "latest" uri having old content and the
"2006" uri having the actual up-to-date editors draft. At the very
least, the link to the latest version ought to return the latest
up-to-date version.


> -- A*
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 23:11:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:18 UTC