- From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 13:57:24 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Hi @nicholascar I would rather avoid any change that would amount to proposing an update to the wording of the agreed definition, and 'base specification' is one of these words. First, regarding the matter itself I think 'base specification' is a matter of the role played by another specification rather than a strong statement about the type of resource and I think this is appropriate. Second, on the meta-level, it avoids another round of terminology discussion. If just because if we remove "specification" and keep only "standard", then we will probably have to re-open the discussion on our understanding of "standard". And honestly the experience of the past week on #275 makes me shiver at the idea of opening an another front. If you are uncomfortable deciding which "base specification" should be kept, then I'm happy to go through the document and make a proposal. -- GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/664#issuecomment-455180489 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2019 13:57:26 UTC