Re: YA proposal to bring /TR/ into the 21st century

On Oct 21, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com> wrote:

> Hmm.  I think it is important that TR/short-name/ continue to work as it has.  The industry knows this is where you go to find specs, and I wouldn't want to have to *decide* which one to read.  On the other hand, I think a convention that was TR/short-name/menu or list or something would be great!   A standardized way to get to the list of all versions of a spec

We have that today for all specs. Click on the date on the TR page. Example:
 http://www.w3.org/standards/history/css-cascade-3

Ian


> .  We tried this in the XHTML working group back in the day, and it was moderately successful.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:
> Speaking of making /TR/ more useful, here's YA proposal ...
> 
> Instead of TR/<shortname>/ resulting in a specific snapshot, it is just a short document with a set of links to the document's various incarnations and the user can then go to the version of choice. F.ex.:
> 
> <ul>
>  <li><a href="github/.../">Latest Editor's Draft</></li>
>  <li><a href="TR/YYYY/FPWD-shortname-YYYYMMDD">First Public Working Draft</a</li>
>  <li><a href="TR/YYYY/WD-shortname-YYYYMMDD">Last Published Working Draft</a</li>
>  <li><a href="TR/YYYY/LCWD-shortname-YYYYMMDD">Last Call Working Draft</a</li>
>  <li><a href="TR/YYYY/CR-shortname-YYYYMMDD">Candidate Recommendation</a</li>
> ...
>   <li><a href="TR/YYYY/REC-shortname-YYYYMMDD">Recommendation</a</li>
> </ul>
> 
> (and use "Not Published" when applicable)
> 
> -Cheers, AB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Shane P. McCarron
> Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                                          +1 718 260 9447

Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 18:02:15 UTC