On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 06:15, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > >does this mean you're > >changing your title? > > I am not doing anything to the doc this week. > I was waiting to see what was said in the telecon (which I won't be > attending ...) > > I think given the scale of comments we've already seen on both docs we are > reviewing this week we need to decide how much change we want before > publication. > > > I no longer believe that this round of WD will be consistent in their > cross-referencing. > > Overall I hope the WG can direct the editors as to the desired changes, and > the editors make a good faith attempt to meet the easier ones in the > timescale, and we just accept a certain amount of screw up as inevitable. Yes, let's. > I fear that all our docs may need considerable work before last call; and > getting on with it seems good - even if it looks a mess from the outside. > > Possibly we could stagger publication. e.g. concepts goes out first, with > refs to previous drafts of everything, then syntax, with refs to new > concepts and previous everything else, etc. I don't think its worth the > effort. I prefer a status fo this document that says that our goal on this > round was to present all the technical material, and we are aware that there > are editorial inconsistencies both internal to each doc and cross-document. Good idea. > > Jeremy > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2002 09:08:37 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:34 EDT