don't rely on use case numbers, especially not across documents

In
 http://research.talis.com/2006/grddl-wg/primer.html
 5758 2006-09-12 22:36:30Z

I see
  "In this section use case #3 is used to explain more fully the role
  of GRDDL in aggregating data from a variety of different sources."

I strongly suggest changing that to
  In this section, the guitar review use case is used to explain...

And in scenario-gallery.htm, I suggest phasing out
the "use_case_3" anchor in favor of "use_case_guitar" or some such.

Other options include
  (a) leave the anchors as is, even if the numbers in the section
  headings change

  (b) make a WG decision that these are the use cases, and that
  while we might add more on the end, we'll never change the order.
  This doesn't guarantee that we'll never change our mind, but
  it acknowledges the hassle of doing so.

  (c) add new anchors while keeping the old ones around, a la:

<h2 id="use_case_synreview">Use case <span id="use_case_3">#3</a> -
Aggregating data:
Stephan wants a synthetic review before buying a guitar.</h2>


see also...

 "Be careful not to break links in revisions. If your document uses latest version
  URIs with a fragment identifier, unless those anchors are maintained across
  versions, links will break."
 -- W3C Manual of Style, section 8. Revisions
 http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#Revisions

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2006 22:31:49 UTC