W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: [WARP4U] WARP with UPnP, was: RE: [widgets] Draft Minutes for 19 November 2009 Voice Conference

From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 12:09:55 -0500
Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>, "Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston)" <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-Id: <22236469-440A-4318-ABF9-512052B97A3F@nokia.com>
To: ext Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
+1, duplicating material is a recipe for disaster.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch

On Dec 2, 2009, at 8:22 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:

> On Dec 1, 2009, at 22:22 , Marcin Hanclik wrote:
>>>> Can you please update this to just be a delta?
>> As far as I know W3C specs, delta documents are usually errata or  
>> WG Notes.
> What we have been calling delta specification in WebApps are  
> specifications that add to another. For instance, WARP adds the  
> <access> element to P+C. It doesn't make some huge cut and paste of P 
> +C just because it modifies. This is as much about sane editing  
> practice and being able to work with a team as it is about clean  
> architecture and separation of concerns.
> The expectation was that WARP4U would add something to WARP, perhaps  
> attributes, perhaps attribute values, perhaps child elements, and  
> certainly some processing. It's a delta spec. It's not considered to  
> be the next version, it's a different feature set.
>> Therefore I would keep the document as it is.
> I then have to maintain the strongest objection possible to it being  
> published, even as FPWD. Such copying is inappropriate, and will  
> lead to no end of editorial problems. It fosters confusion and  
> brings no value.
> -- 
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Thursday, 3 December 2009 17:24:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:21 UTC