W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > October 2009

Re: ACTION-1021 Tweak CT Problem Statement and Propose to Group

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:58:33 +0100
Message-ID: <4ADD6DA9.4020706@mtld.mobi>
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
CC: Public BPWG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi Francois

I'd be happy with that. If we can agree it on the call this afternoon 
that would be great.

Jo

On 20/10/2009 08:55, Francois Daoust wrote:
> Hi Jo,
> 
> Given that the CT Landscape is to remain as is for a long time, I would 
> not anchor it in time with a mention of the Last Call Working Draft of 
> the guidelines. The guidelines should not stay as last call forever. I 
> would also clarify that by "historical" we mean the guidelines were 
> inspired by this document but may precisely follow this set of 
> requirements. Or is "historical" clear enough for everyone? I suggest 
> the two following changes.
> 
> 
> In the abstract, I suggest to replace:
> [[ In this revision the document is largely historical - the 
> Transformation Guidelines document having been published as a Last Call 
> Working Draft . ]]
> 
> by:
> [[ In this revision the document is largely historical: the Content 
> Transformation Guidelines document, published under the title 
> "Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies" [LINK to 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/] and initially inspired by the set 
> of requirements identified in this document, has evolved based on 
> available technologies and feedback and may not precisely follow these 
> requirements anymore. ]]
> 
> or by something similar in real English ;)
> 
> 
> 
> In the Status of This document section, I would also replace:
> [[ non-normative W3C Recommendation on content adaptation ]]
> by:
> [[ Guidelines for Web Content Transformation Proxies ]]
> and update the link to point to
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/ct-guidelines/
> as the charter it currently points to is obsolete.
> 
> I'll update the Status of This Document section when I prepare the 
> document for publication anyway to note that the we do not expect to 
> work on this document any further (and as required to please the 
> publication rules checker), so I can handle that second update unless 
> someone disagrees.
> 
> 
> Francois.
> 
> 
> Jo Rabin wrote:
>> As discussed on last week's call I have made some minor edits to the 
>> CT Problem Statement. I've taken the liberty of preparing it for 
>> publication on Thursday next week in the hope that we will agree that 
>> on our call on Tuesday.
>>
>> The document is at [1] and diff from the published version is at [2].
>>
>> Jo
>>
>> [1] 
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/ProblemStatement/CTProblemStatement.html 
>>
>>
>> (http://tinyurl.com/yjqphe2)
>>
>>
>> [2] 
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-ct-landscape-20071025/&doc2=http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/CT/editors-drafts/ProblemStatement/CTProblemStatement.html 
>>
>>
>> (http://tinyurl.com/yzww24f)
>>
>>
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 07:59:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:09:02 UTC