Re: WebArch draft, 14 Oct 2004

On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 14:11, Norman Walsh wrote:
> / Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> was heard to say:
> | On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 16:05, Norman Walsh wrote:
> |> The webarch draft at
> |> 
> |>   http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20041014/
> |> 
> |> reflects my best effort to incorporate all of the decisions reached at
> |> the Basel f2f meeting along with editorial suggestions proposed by
> |> several readers. I made another end-to-end editorial pass as well.
> |> 
> |> I am not aware of any outstanding decisions not reflected in this
> |> draft, (which doesn't mean there aren't any :-)
> |
> | In 1.1 I still see
> |
> | "... in accordance with RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. However ..."
> |
> | Did you change your mind, or forget?
> |
> | "After discussion, it seemed that the use of these keywords in webarch
> | is as appropriate as the use in RFC2119 itself. Concerns about
> | "conformance" turned out to be misplaced; the constraints in RFC2119
> | regard interoperability, and as such, the editor was advised to change
> | the "however" in "in accordance with RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. However, ..."."
> |   -- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/10/05-07-tag.html#webarch-dc
> 
> I forgot. Now I look at it, I'm not sure what change I was advised to make.
> Is it just to delete the word "However"?

Essentially, yes; perhaps you're in the mood to inser a paragraph break
or do the transition some other way, as long as it doesn't convey
that webarch is an exception to RFC2119.

> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E