W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2002

Architecture doc

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 11:31:54 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301111545.0247ccb0@pop.intergate.ca>
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
I refer to the latest version of the architecture doc at
 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/toc.html

1. Versioning

The first problem is that this thing isn't dated or versioned so
there's no way to be sure that the version I'm talking about is
the one you're reading; I assume this can be fixed per normal
W3C pubstyle.

2. Addressing

This thing needs anchors or a numbered outline or whatever 
so we can talk about pieces of it.

3. Structure/Outline

I still feel about as I did in our face-to-face.  The 
general outline and structure are reasonable.  I think that
the first two sections are much stronger then the second
two, as evidenced by the fact that I think all our issues
to date go in the first two and none in the second two.  
BTW, I think someone has an action item to place some 
more of our issues in-line?

4. TimBL's Design Issues series

We need to as a group develop consensus as to which of
these should be linked to.  For example, I thought the 
material in the "Axioms of" and "The Myth of" docs was
appropriate and probably not controversial and deserves
to be in this; on the other hand I had real problems with
some of "Generic resources" and am not sure it belongs.

Also I'm not sure Tim's writing/presentation style are
optimal for something occupying this central a position -
probably they should be regularized into something closer
to a standard TAG pubstyle. 

5. Consensus 

I think we all should take responsibility for examining
this thing pretty closely so that we can be sure that
it represents TAG consensus except where otherwise
labeled. 

  -Tim
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 14:32:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT