W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Would like section references in all W3C legal agreements

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:18:53 -0500
Cc: "site-comments@w3.org" <site-comments@w3.org>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Message-Id: <833A7C21-063E-41CD-9910-3A970A91CCF4@w3.org>
To: "Vickers, Mark" <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com>
Hi Mark,

Thanks for the feedback. I recall adding a bunch of anchors to the CG process:
 http://www.w3.org/community/about/

I'll take your advice and go add some for the cg legal agreements. 

Ian

On 17 May 2012, at 4:05 PM, Vickers, Mark wrote:

> In discussions with W3C legal staff and member legal staff about W3C agreements, a nice feature of some W3C agreements is that we can pass a link to a specific section of those agreements, e.g.
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-exclusion-resign
> 
> However, the availability of internal links in W3C agreements seems to be very inconsistent, in three categories:
> 
> 1.. Visible links: The best agreements have a Table of Contents and clickable links in sections:
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-exclusion-resign
> 
> 2. Hidden links: Other agreements have no visible links, but the underlying document has id attributes which can be used for linking, but only by the technically savvy:
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/2009/12/Member-Agreement#terms
> 
> 3. No links: Some agreements have no internal links at all:
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/cla/
> 
> It's disappointing that the more recent agreement for CGs is the least linkable!
> 
> It would be great if all W3C agreements were republished consistently, with visible links to each numbered section.
> 
> Note that this is not the highest-priority request.
> 
> Thanks,
> mav
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 19:18:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:34 GMT