W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Why Design Principles?

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 19:34:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4A25B720.5080204@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> Ian and Anne both suggested that I should add most of this 
>>> justification to the Design Principles document itself. I will likely 
>>> replace the current abstract and introduction with something based on 
>>> this email. I suggest that those with an interest in the Design 
>>> Principles should voice their objections to this plan.
>> Would you be adverse to those with an interest in the Design 
>> Principles voicing support for this plan?  :-)
>> I believe that the text below, when both the 'content' and 'tone' are 
>> taken into consideration, go a long way towards satisfying the 
>> requests for a 'disclaimer'.  In particular, the text explicitly 
>> acknowledges that not all of the principles enjoy full agreement, and 
>> that not all of the principles have proven to be useful.  Giving 
>> people an opportunity to add to this list -- with you providing 
>> editorial control over the 'tone' of the additions -- would also be a 
>> good idea, IMHO.
>> The only paragraph I see that requires major rework is the one that 
>> starts with "The Design Principles never quite advanced to a formally 
>> adopted Note.".  My suggestion is that the bulk of the remaining 
>> content and tone be retained intact.
> Thanks for voicing your support. I think sections 1 and 2 are the most 
> suitable as replacement front matter.

My support was predicated on sections 1 through 8 being included.

>>> There are also some suggested additions and removals of principles at 
>>> the end.
>> My suggestion is that you incorporate them into the document exactly 
>> as you have done below: as suggestions.  Perhaps this section doesn't 
>> go into the abstract or introduction, but instead in an appendix or 
>> other back matter.
> I'll think about what to do with that content. Suggestions from others 
> along similar lines are welcome as well. It strikes me as odd that the 
> Design Principles document would declare parts of itself to be not 
> useful, or that it would suggest additions which are not actually present.

I actually think that by setting expectations appropriately it makes the 
design principles *more* useful.  Future projects who wish to take a 
similar approach are likely to encounter the same or similar issues. 
There is no magic bullet and this document should not be a marketing 
brochure.  Reality is complicated and always incomplete.  As a Note this 
document can identify areas that merit further exploration.

> Regards,
> Maciej

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 23:35:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:48 UTC