Re: New round of Working Drafts (was Re: New split-out drafts)

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > [in reply to suggestions by Larry] 
> In general, I have no problem with these wording changes, in that none 
> of them are false or misleading. But I do have three minor comments 
> here:
> 1) "does not imply endorsement by the majority of members of the W3C 
> HTML working group" ==> Strictly speaking, it does not imply endorsement 
> by *any* of the members of the W3C HTML Working Group, but saying "the 
> majority of" implies that a majority disapproves. I do not think that is 
> established. Nor is majority endorsement a relevant standard for W3C 
> decisions. Thus, I think both HTML Microdata and HTML+RDFa should simply 
> say: "The publication of this document by the W3C as a W3C Working Draft 
> does not imply endorsement by the W3C HTML Working Group or the W3C as a 
> whole."

I haven't included that exact text because there was already more 
strongly-worded text to that effect that was carefully crafted in response 
to much earlier comments. Please let me know if that is a problem.

I didn't make the other changes Larry suggested since Maciej disagreed 
with them. Please let me know if there are specific edits that do need to 
be made that I missed.

(I haven't yet looked at the edits Paul requested.)

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 09:49:34 UTC