W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2010

Re: [CSS21] [css3-color] colorimetry references

From: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 17:59:32 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=OePFDnkaZMK00xw5zuktteeDHa78c6ze9aFfH@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
> I have updated the bibliographic database used by CSS WG so that the third edition (all parts, not just one specific part) of CIE 15:2004 is the one referenced.

I thank you, Chris.

> In the absence of a better URI I left it as is, but did update the ISBN to the correct one.

The URL "http://cms.cie.co.at/Publications/index.php?i_ca_id=304"
identifies a resource that, around 2010-10-07, has a representation
that I find more pleasant than I find the representation of the
resource that the URL "http://www.cie.co.at/publ/abst/15-2004.html"
identifies. I presume that the variation over time between the sets of
representations of the former resource will be greater than the
variation over time between the sets of representations of the latter
resource. In less precise words, the former URL is unstable. I suspect
that a change to the server configuration will leave the former
resource with an empty set of representations (HTTP status code “404”)
sooner rather than later.

Neither URL identifies the publication in question. It would be
inappropriate to write that the publication in question is “available
at” the former URL. It would be inappropriate to write that the
publication in question is “available at” the latter URL.

I don’t know of a good option here. (The W3C as a whole and the
community around it should investigate the problem of citations to
works that are inaddressable, inaccessible, or unstable. Chris, please
mention the problem to other people in the W3C Team.)

> %R CIE Publication 15:2004

The correct identifier is simply “CIE 15:2004”. Use the correct identifier.

Include editors’ names in the citation or explain why the working
group has chosen to exclude them.

> Etan, please confirm that this addresses your comment.

Chris, your message addresses my comment.
Received on Sunday, 10 October 2010 22:00:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:32 GMT