W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Spec Guidelines

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 20 Mar 2002 16:31:50 -0600
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>, spec-prod@w3.org, www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1016663511.26207.9.camel@dirk>
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.


Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2002 17:31:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:16 UTC