Re: {off topic} [was:[W3C docs] We should teach by example.]

Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, 2007-07-06 10:22 -0500:

> On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 23:21 +0900, Michael(tm) Smith wrote:
> > Josh Sled <jsled@asynchronous.org>, 2007-07-06 09:50 -0400:
> > 
> > > gonchuki <gonchuki@gmail.com> writes:
> > > > I have been looking through the source code of the "HTML 5 differences
> > > > from HTML 4" document [1] as part of the Spanish translation task
> > > > along with Alejandro Fernández and it came to my notice that the
> > > > source is in pretty bad condition.
> > > 
> > > While it looks like it's missing a close </body></html>, it's not obvious
> > > why you think it's in "bad condition", or isn't "friendly" or "human
> > > readable".   What's an example?
> > 
> > I'd like to suggest that if we want to keep list traffic on the
> > HTML working group's mailing list focused on the work that the
> > group is chartered to do,
> 
> Surely this document qualifies.
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/diff/

It certainly qualifies for discussion of its technical content.
Does it qualify for discussion of the formatting and indent style
and such of the markup in its source?

The more that this list gets inundated with discussions about what
issues that are marginal to the real work of the group (as this
one seems to me to be) the more people are going to tune out and
start ignoring messages from this list, and risk missing
discussion of actual substantive issues because they can't
discern them among all the background noise.

  --Mike

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/
http://sideshowbarker.net/