On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 11:38, Lofton Henderson wrote: [...] > Regarding http://www.w3.org/Guide/Reports [...] > "The Webmaster must have confirmation from the Team contact that: > 1.The status section is novel and complete per the guidelines (per > April 1999 Chairs meeting)" > > where "guidelines" is a link to Reports#status (containing lots of > bold-face "must"). So the way I would read this is that at least the > Reports#status stuff is normative (the same #status stuff is in Manual of > Style, the apparent successor to "Reports"). Yup... good catch. > I think this could all be simplified by merging the pieces together, with > clear indication of normative/informative status of the various bits. I still don't prefer that approach, but I agree it's not right as is. Hmm... -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 17:31:23 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:11 GMT