- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 22:27:14 +0000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
On Wednesday, 14 December 2011 at 22:14, fantasai wrote: > On 12/13/2011 07:34 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > > = > > The references need to show what the spec author was referring to when > > he wrote the text he wrote. If a spec is updated after that, either > > the reference will still be valid (no problem), or it will be broken > > because of the update - in that case, the people reading the spec need > > to know that the text they are reading does NOT refer to the newer > > specification. > > > > I've actually run into this problem with references to UAX29. > Older versions just defined "grapheme clusters". Newer ones > have "legacy grapheme clusters" and "extended grapheme clusters". > If there wasn't a dated reference, it would be unclear what the > editor meant. So I like Karl's suggestion to include both. I agree that citing both could work. Reminds me that at university we always had to cite the "date accessed" of a Web resource with the URL. So, you could basically keep pointing to the latest version, but also include a link to the cited dated version as fallback in case things go bad (such as defined concepts changing name on you). -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 22:27:50 UTC