W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > February 2013

How should we represent the status of a spec?

From: Julee <julee@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:39:21 -0800
To: <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD42D1C9.56BDC%julee@adobe.com>
Hi, everyone:

We discussed the following bug at the last meeting: Finalize categories of
"Standardization Status": stable, proprietary, draft (bug #20386
<https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20386> ). And we have other
threads about this issue (such as "Subject: Standards status categories

You can see an example on the font-size page
<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/css/properties/font-size> , after the
title. You'll see the words "W3C Recommendation". These spec status values
are not very usable as presented.

We want to take as a given that the community does need to know the status
so it can be encouraged to participate in the standard development process.
The community does need to know if a spec is in "last call" or whatnot.

But given that:
* What is your option on providing different values than those of W3C?
* Can you suggest values or a presentation more immediately helpful to WPD
visitors? (One example of useful status was provided: html5please.com
<http://html5please.com/#gradients> )
* How should we represent feature status so visitor knows whether it's in
most browsers? Production-ready?
* Should we add information about level of usability? Providing both values?
* Should we move this info to the bottom of the page? Near compatibility? Or
should it stay up top for easy identification? Maybe an easy flag up top
with details below?
Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated! And if you think you can
provide a solution, please speak up. If you feel you have enough information
from the above resources and any discussion ensuing from this query email to
draft a proposal, please let us know and use the proposals namespace
<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals>  to write something up!


Received on Friday, 15 February 2013 01:40:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:47 UTC