W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2004

Re: LC Comment - Script & Progressive Rendering / Multiple Pages

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:42:36 +0100
To: "Mark Moore" <mark.moore@notlimited.com>
Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <41b70ac8.256992015@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Mark Moore wrote:
>A (hopefully) simple compromise would be to clearly mark the CSS2 spec as
>superseded by CSS2.1.  RFC's have used this technique quite successfully.
>The older documents remain available, but the superseding RFC is clearly
>identified at the top.

Once published, RFCs are never changed, only the obsoleting document
indentifies the obsoleted documents (as does the rfc-index document).
And it is not that simple actually, consider an RFC is published that
obsoletes RFC 2119 and re-defines "MUST" to mean "MAY" and "SHOULD"
to mean "MUST", etc., would this mean pretty much any internet or web
software would become non-conforming? No, not really.

>This modification of CSS2 could be done using the same mechanism and in the
>same revision cycle Jim Ley (possibly?), or someone else uses to remove the
>"proposed errata" from the existing document.  

See http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/tr.html#rec-modify on how
the "proposed errata" bit can be removed (assuming you mean making them
normative as opposed to discarding the maintenance efforts). See also
http://www.w3.org/2004/02/02-pubrules.html#head which specifies require-
ments on revision numbers (not that these mandatory requirements are
followed or make sense...)
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2004 12:43:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:35 GMT