- From: Ambrose Li <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:29:29 -0500
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Jens Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>, www-style@w3.org
2009/1/16 Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>: > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:12:54 +0100, Jens Meiert <jens@meiert.com> wrote: >> >> I'm very well aware of that (unfortunately). However, my feeling is >> that we should all encourage and be happy about error reports coming >> in that take into account the latest (if not any) official document >> (spec, note, whatever). Expecting yet demanding users (and I consider >> me to be one when it comes to reading CSS 3 multi-column layout >> modules drafts here) to check out a dev version that doesn't even >> appear as an HTML comment in the doc in question is, and that is my >> outright honest two cents, at least unwise, probably even rude. >> >> Unless there's any doubt on how I mean what we may just leave it at that. > > I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just saying that your effort might be > in vain, which would be a shame. > > The CSS WG tries to keep all its public editor drafts in this directory: > > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/ In that case this link should appear in the public draft somewhere, preferably very conspicuously. The public draft does have a link to "The Latest Version", but that "Latest" version is not http://dev.w3.org/csswg/. We can't expect people to know that this page exists (*especially* if another page is claimed to be "Latest"). > I hope that helps. -- cheers, -ambrose The 'net used to be run by smart people; now many sites are run by idiots. So SAD... (Sites that do spam filtering on mails sent to the abuse contact need to be cut off the net...)
Received on Friday, 16 January 2009 19:30:05 UTC