Re: EPUB 3.2 Editorial Assignments

Great, thanks! Links work; I indicated what I checked on the Google Sheet.

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 4:22 PM Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote:

> If the links work, they are fine. The strings come from a spec ref
> database which has evolved over the years, and does not have editorial
> consistency as a core value :)
>
> Dave
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 6:57 PM James Briano <jamesbriano@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have questions about the capitalization and hyphen conventions in C.1
>> Normative references
>> <https://w3c.github.io/publ-epub-revision/epub32/spec/epub-contentdocs.html#normative-references> and
>> C.2 Informative references
>> <https://w3c.github.io/publ-epub-revision/epub32/spec/epub-contentdocs.html#informative-references>
>>
>> Some non-acronyms and initialisms are capitalized like this:* [ContentDocs301]
>> *and *[CSS-Fonts-3] *and *[W3CProcess]*
>> Should the following changes occur:
>> [MATHML3] to [MathML3]
>> [PRONUNCIATION-LEXICON] to [Pronunciation-Lexicon]
>> [RDFA-CORE] to [RDFa-Core]
>> [WEBIDL] to [Web-IDL] (hyphen added as well, see below)
>> [XML-NAMES] to [XML-Names]
>>
>> Some spaces are represented by a hyphen like this:* [DOM-Level-2-Style]* and
>> in a few examples above.
>> Should the following changes occur:
>> [CSSSnapshot] to [CSS-Snapshot]
>> [W3CProcess] to [W3C-Process]
>> [ContentDocs301] to [Content-Docs-301]
>> [AttributeExtensions] to [Attribute-Extensions]
>> [EPUB32Changes] to [EPUB32-Changes]
>> [EPUB3Overview] to [EPUB3-Overview]
>> [EPUBAccessibility] to [EPUB-Accessibility]
>> [WebWorkers] to [Web-Workers]
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> If these are correct the way they are, just let me know--there's no need
>> explaining *why* as I know you all are short on time and I'll figure it
>> out myself.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> James Briano
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 9:27 AM John B. Costa <jbcosta@repubit.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Rachel:  3.2 CHANGES Review
>>>
>>> 6.0 – 6.9 Reviewed,  Links checked,  no errors or typos.
>>> I submitted one recommendation to GitHub for 6.5
>>> <https://w3c.github.io/publ-epub-revision/epub32/spec/epub-changes.html#structural-semantics>
>>>   It looks like it was just inserted…. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Let me know if there is anything else I can assist with.
>>>
>>>
>>> *John B. Costa  *CEO - RePubIT, LLC | Chair: IEEE ADB Committee
>>> Sanford FL 32771 USA   +1 321 262-3626
>>> jbcosta@repubit.com  |  www.linkedin.com/in/johnbcosta1
>>>
>>> *Natural Talents Applied Well*
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Rachel Comerford <rachel.comerford@macmillan.com>
>>> Date: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 5:10 PM
>>> To: John Costa <jbcosta@repubit.com>
>>> Cc: W3C EPUB 3 Community Group <public-epub3@w3.org>
>>> Subject: Re: EPUB 3.2 Editorial Assignments
>>>
>>> Thanks John!
>>>
>>> Rachel Comerford | Senior Director of Content Standards and
>>> Accessibility | T 212.576.9433
>>>
>>> *Macmillan Learning*
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:31 PM, John B. Costa <jbcosta@repubit.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rachel:
>>>>
>>>> EPUB3.2 Changes Tab:
>>>>
>>>>    - 5.0-5.3 look good.  No typo’s, grammatical, or language issues.
>>>>    Links all resolve to the correct docs or location within 3.2.
>>>>    - I am working on 6.0-6.9 this evening.  Should be finished by
>>>>    tomorrow morning EDT.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *John B. Costa  *CEO - RePubIT, LLC | Chair: IEEE ADB Committee
>>>> Sanford FL 32771 USA   +1 321 262-3626
>>>> jbcosta@repubit.com  |  www.linkedin.com/in/johnbcosta1
>>>>
>>>> *Natural Talents Applied Well*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Rachel Comerford <rachel.comerford@macmillan.com>
>>>> Date: Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 12:51 PM
>>>> To: W3C EPUB 3 Community Group <public-epub3@w3.org>
>>>> Subject: EPUB 3.2 Editorial Assignments
>>>> Resent-From: <public-epub3@w3.org>
>>>> Resent-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 16:52:26 +0000
>>>>
>>>> In order to increase the likelihood that our specs have received
>>>> sufficient review, we are reviving an editorial review practice initiated
>>>> with 3.1. In this google spreadsheet
>>>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TDcBudM9UTm41PxFAX3UqGlvcqNertJpdYNZ0WWq758/edit#gid=483122108>
>>>> is a list of assignees and the sections we would like them to review. We
>>>> have to keep the sections reasonable. Please review your section by end of
>>>> day September 7th. If you are unable to review your section, please notify
>>>> me immediately so I can reassign your sections.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To perform your review, please read the listed sections carefully,
>>>> looking for any issues, such as clarity in language and consistency. You do
>>>> not have to be a subject matter expert in the area that you are reviewing.
>>>> If you find any problems, please report them using github, or use the
>>>> mailing list if that would be more appropriate. Once you have completed
>>>> your review, whether you have found errors or not, please email me directly
>>>> so I can note the section has been covered. When reviewing a section, you
>>>> may stop when a new section not on your list starts.
>>>>
>>>> Here again is a link to the assignments. I will also be emailing
>>>> participants separately to notify them of assignments:
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TDcBudM9UTm41PxFAX3UqGlvcqNertJpdYNZ0WWq758/edit#gid=483122108
>>>>
>>>> If you do not have an assignment and would like to contribute, please
>>>> let me know!!
>>>> Rachel and Dave
>>>>
>>>> Rachel Comerford | Senior Director of Content Standards and
>>>> Accessibility | T 212.576.9433
>>>>
>>>> *Macmillan Learning*
>>>>
>>>
>>>