Re: Where is the "complete document"

> On Jan 23, 2015, at 2:06 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 22 Jan 2015, at 23:22, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Sam Pinkus <sgpinkus@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 01/23/2015 06:36 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>> Woah, *that's* an old document.  It'll celebrate its 14th birthday
>>> 
>>> Yet still one of the top results on popular search engines for "css3
>>> specification".
>> 
>> Holy crap you're right, it's the 4th result for me.  Let's... get that
>> slapped with an obsoletion notice.
>> 
>> Peter, Daniel, who can I talk to about maintaining that document?  It
>> desperately needs a notice that it's an old and out-of-date document
>> that should only be referenced as a historical artifact.
> 
> Given how we've handled obsolete documents with no chance of progress recently, this should be retired from the REC track entirely, and turned into a note. Probably a gutted one.
> 
> - Florian

Gut it, but add a link to "Current Work" or wherever it is we want people to go after finding it through Google. It might then also help Google return better results. 

Received on Friday, 23 January 2015 15:32:16 UTC