W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: References Re: What are the requirements/problems? Re: Working on New Styles for W3C Specifications

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:10:02 -0600
Message-ID: <4EE9029A.50306@aptest.com>
To: spec-prod@w3.org
Just on a related point...  in the XHTML specs, the RDFa specs, and a 
variety of others, we always made / make a postscript and a PDF version 
available as part of the package.  I would really like that to be 
included in this mix.

On 12/14/2011 1:49 PM, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote:
> Marcos
>
> believe it or not, lots of people still print materials for reading offline. Or print to PDF for reading on an ipad etc.
>
> A bibliography is useful because you can see what is referenced, in one place, all at once, offline and without any clicking ;)
>
> Similar to the idea of a "snapshot" as opposed to "living document" -  static references offer clarity of intent (what was referenced when the document was created, avoiding various ambiguities due to subsequent changes in or loss of referenced material).
>
> regards, Frederick
>
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
>
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2011, at 12:12 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, 1 December 2011 at 19:44, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:19:27 +0100, Marcos Caceres<w3c@marcosc.com (mailto:w3c@marcosc.com)>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> 4. Do we really still need a bibliography when we use hypertext and in
>>>> the age of living standards?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yep.
>>>
>>>> How do people actually use bibliographies in the age of HTML (i.e., do
>>>> people care when something was published, who published it, etc. andwhy
>>>> or why not?)?
>>>>
>>> Its primary use is in printed versions, with a strong secondary use in
>>> documents about the spec. In both those cases there is still quite a lot
>>> of usage of the kinds of information you mentioned. Given that it is
>>> common to refer to a document by a title and someone who put the words
>>> there, the author or editor's name(s) are important in many cases,
>>> although it would work to say that a document was produced by "W3C's
>>> WigwamForAGossesBridle Working Group" - or even "W3C" for documents which
>>> are published with consensus.
>>>
>>
>>>> Can't we just do away with bibliographies and just cross link to
>>>> specifications.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not in a printed version,
>> I still would like to see what this means. In practice, trying to "use" a printed spec is hard (it's not really searchable, and you can't really find what terms means because they are defined throughout a specification).
>>> and since printing from the web is still a bit
>>> arcane that probably means we need it in the standard published version.
>>> Since we MUST have it for when people print,
>>>
>> It would be good to know how often that happens too (and why?). Anyone that has worked with me knows I print all specs like crazy and can't read long documents from screen. However, I only print specs to review them with a red penů not to work from (specs I use every day are bookmarked for easy access).
>>> we don't get to save much
>>> work by cutting it out of online versions.
>>>
>> I agree, particularly with everything Julian said in responding to this thread. I think the right thing to do is to do both: include references separated by normative and informative, but I still don't see any use case for including the author, date, or organization that produced the document.
>>> That said we could do smarter things than making people go via the
>>> references section to follow a link - a style like
>>>
>>> ...in the case where _FudgeAPI stickiness_ [FUDGE] is used ...
>>>
>>> would probably be more helpful in an HTML document online.
>>>
>>> IMHO
>>>
>>> chaals
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
>>> je parle franšais -- hablo espa˝ol -- jeg kan litt norsk
>>> http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 20:10:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:18 GMT