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 16:06:44 -0600
Message-ID: <4EE91DF4.1040704@aptest.com>
To: spec-prod@w3.org


On 12/14/2011 4:02 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
> The convention is simple:
>
> [FOO] always points to the latest version, i.e. for W3C that's /TR/foo/
> [FOO-20120315] is the dated version, i.e. for W3C /TR/2012/WD-foo-20120315/
>   [FOO-20120315] should _never_ happen, unless you are doing something non-normative: "Because of screwups in [FOO-20120315], bla bla bla"

I actually disagree.  If 20120315 is a REC anyway.  There are LOTS of 
specs that need to reference a specific version of another spec.  Look 
at XHTML Modularization, for example.  It references XML 1.0 Fourth 
Edition even though there are later editions available.  There were 
important technical reasons for this.  Regardless, there needs to be a 
way to do this.  Normatively.

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 22:09:35 GMT

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