- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 17:35:22 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
Re 1. Yes we are. Per #51 we toned down the language to the extent we considered possible, without simply saying "Oh look, an annotation" Re 2. An editorial aesthetic, rather than a functional deficiency. Re 3. Sure, in error states, you react to the error as appropriate. Other than prefixing every requirement with "If there are no errors, then ..." is there a better way to record the requirements? Re 4. The intent of the section is to provide guidance on which codes to use in which situations, not to create application specific semantics. If there _are_ application specific semantics that are not part of the HTTP spec, that should be fixed. It could also be set as `informative` to help clarify. -- GitHub Notification of comment by azaroth42 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/313#issuecomment-228410163 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 24 June 2016 17:35:24 UTC