W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > March 2011

Dropping DraftReportWithTransclusion from agenda - going once...

From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:39:54 -0500
To: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110304143954.GA1988@octavius>
Dear all,

I see the potential for confusion between DraftReport [1]
and DraftReportWithTransclusion [2].  The latter page [2],
which "transcludes" (includes, imports...) the full text of
many of the documents only referenced from [1], was prepared
by Jodi on 15 February using the now-superseded 10 February
version of Draft Report [3].

In my understanding, the transcluded report at the time served
the useful purpose of showing us, in one integrated document,
many (though not all) of the useful passages of writing we
had hitherto drafted.

Since DraftReportWithTransclusion [2] was created, DraftReport
[1] has continued to evolve, so in order to avoid confusion, I
plan to delete the reference to [2] from our agenda.  Does anyone

If we decide to transclude component pages into DraftReport,
Jodi has shown us how easily this can be done [4].  Rather than
chopping up or pruning the component pages to make them fit for
transcluding, however, I would prefer to leave them untouched
and build up the content of DraftReport by cutting-and-pasting
from component drafts or (better) rewriting in-place.  At this
stage, however, there is probably room for both working styles.
The important thing is that people take it upon themselves
to contribute chunks of analysis that we can digest, review,
and edit as a group.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReport 
[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportWithTransclusion
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=DraftReport&oldid=3031
[4] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=DraftReportWithTransclusion&diff=3120&oldid=3104

Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 14:40:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:57 UTC