W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > April 2004

Re: Proposed Quality Tip -- Time in URIs (was URI Usability)

From: Rajasekaran Deepak <deepakr@students.iiit.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:38:44 +0530
To: www-qa@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040421070844.GA29732@students.iiit.net>

* olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> 2004-04-15
> On Apr 14, 2004, at 04:43, Rajasekaran Deepak wrote:
> >Proposed quality tip: "Time in URIs"
> ><http://students.iiit.net/~deepakr/time-uri/>
> >(with '<base href="http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/" />' and related changes)

> - Whether people will read the full tip will depend on whether the 
> title of the tip is interesting. "Time in URIs" does not excite my 
> curiosity, it merely makes me go "uh?". And I guess "dated URIs" may 
> be, if not more interesting, at least clearer.

Renamed tip to "Dated URIs" as you suggested. Changed URI of tip from
<http://students.iiit.net/~deepakr/time-uri/> to
<http://students.iiit.net/~deepakr/dated-uri/>. Providing a permanent
redirect from the old URI to the new one.

I request the QA Team to update the URI in <http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/>.

> - We have to remember that these are "quick tips", not one chapter in a 
> larger document. A short introduction is in order.

Added introduction.

> - The tips are supposed to be helpful bits of information, not 
> authoritative, dry specifications. The tips should therefore suggest 
> and justify, not slam "must"s at the reader. In our case, with "Time in 
> URIs", there is no justification, just two cases and what must be done? 
> Why? Why not do the contrary? What's the point? Tips have to be short, 
> granted, but too short is just not helpful.

Removed "must"s.

> - Making references to other documents is a good idea, if they develop 
> the ideas of the tip, or give techniques, etc. In the case of "Time in 
> URIs", why not give a small explanation with the references? Also, I 
> don't think all of them, esp. the link to the mail thread, bring a lot 
> of value added.

Added explanations for references.
Removed the link to the mail thread.

> - If making reference to a normative specification, try to explain its 
> acronym(s) or give its full name, with the appropriate markup if 
> possible. In this case, what's ISO8601? What does it talk about? How is 
> it relevant to the tip? is it an ISO standard on dates/time in URIs?

Added full name of ISO and '<abbr/>' markup.
Added short explanation of ISO 8601.
-- 
Rajasekaran Deepak <http://students.iiit.net/~deepakr/>
Received on Wednesday, 21 April 2004 03:10:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:14:00 GMT