Re: [SpecGL] Editorial changes - 8 March 2005

Le mardi 08 mars 2005 à 17:53 -0500, Karl Dubost a écrit :
> 08 March 2005
> 	* 1040: Done change structure/numbering
> 		There's a need for an XSLT to create the TOC catching h1 to h5

FWIW, before working on this, I think we need:
- a proposal and the implementation to fix 1058 (structure and numbering
inconsistent)
- at least the start of implementing our fix to 1144 (workflow and spec
spec mix up)

> PS: Dom, do you mind if we switch from REMIND to something which means 
> there's nothing more to do with it, when the editorial changes have 
> been made.

Well, I interpreted the "REMIND" state as meaning "we still need to get
back to the commenter"; I think the best we can do to help tracking
sub-states is using keywords; I have been using "needsAction" when an
issue resolution was pending an action item for someone, and
"needsReview" when an issue resolution was pending approval of a
proposed resolution. So we could add a new keyword, either
"needsImplementation" and change all the issues that haven't been
implemented yet, or "implemented" and change all the issues that have
been implemented. What do you think?

> Possible contradiction:
> Issue 986 - Conformance section for a technology or for a 
> specification	RESOLUTION: Solved with the notion of Umbrella 
> Specification.

FWIW, I don't think the notion of umbrella specification ever really
solved the problem, since it was not used in any normative part of
SpecGL; in addition, I think our current requirement that any technical
report should have a conformance section solves this issue (although not
very elegantly).

Dom
-- 
Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/
W3C/ERCIM
mailto:dom@w3.org