- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:18:10 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: public-appformats@w3.org, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Hi Ian, Cameron, I asked Ian Jacobs to clarify the W3C's Referencing Policy in the context of this thread (i.e. "referring to unstable drafts") and this is what he reported: [[ Here is the text [from the W3C Manual of Style]: <http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#normative> "Normative references should be to stable and mature resources (e.g., only Recommendations)." Thus, it is not forbidden. Especially when a document is a draft, it seems unproblematic. The Manual of Style also says: 'If a reference is a W3C Recommendation track technical report that has not reached Recommendation, state in the References section that it is "work in progress."' Once the document becomes a Proposed Recommendation, it is ill-advised to refer to an instable document, as the group is likely to have to wait until the unstable reference becomes a Proposed Recommendation before it can continue to advance. ]] Art --- On Jan 8, 2007, at 6:19 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Cameron McCormack wrote: >> >> 1.3 Security Concerns >> ===================== >> >> XBL prevents this by requiring that the cookie attribute on the >> DocumentWindow interface be set to null. >> >> Should there be a reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/Window/ there? > > W3C process doesn't allow us to refer to unstable drafts, as I > understand > it, so I don't think we can do that. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E ) > \._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _ > \ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'-- > (,_..'`-.;.' >
Received on Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:18:57 UTC