On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: ... > > The respec conversion is useful no matter what. Having 2 documents, 1 that > normatively specs some things, and one that is a historical reference does > sound like a reasonable thing, even though as you said, it seems not > entirely clear yet which feature will go in which. > > However, to make things clear, I suggest that: > > * The historical reference should use WG-NOTE as the status > done > > * Both documents should explicitly reference > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/raw-file/tip/editing.html, preferably > using a Previous Versions link ( > http://www.w3.org/respec/ref.html#previousuri) > done > > * Avoid duplication. Either we're (attempting to) normatively define > something and it goes in the spec, or we're not, and it goes in the note > (if it's worth preserving at all other than in VCS). > we will need to work on that. If we start working on the documents, I think it should go pretty quickly to move them in different directions. > > Best regards, > - Florian > > > -- Johannes Wilm Fidus Writer http://www.fiduswriter.org
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2015 20:29:46 UTC