- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 14:02:13 +0000
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
I believe the ACTION-190 was closed when this document was published in January. See: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html-markup-20110113/ and of course it was republished recently: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html-markup-20110405/ Does that answer your question? /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 -----Original Message----- From: Noah Mendelsohn [mailto:nrm@arcanedomain.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 2:44 PM To: Paul Cotton Cc: public-html@w3.org; Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org); www-tag@w3.org Subject: Re: author-only view of HTML5 and ACTION-190 Paul, I was wondering whether you might give me an update on the status of this? I followed some of the links from your ACTION-190 [1]; as best I can tell it was put off for a week on 6 January 2011 [2], and then I lose the trail. This is about getting the author-only view back into the HTML5 Rec-track publication packages. I have TAG ACTION 379, which is basically to make sure this happens eventually, so it would be helpful to know where this stands. Thank you very much. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/190 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2011JanMar/0001.html [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/379 On 11/4/2010 6:16 AM, Paul Cotton wrote: > I am bringing forward how we handled ISSUE-59 since Noah M, (TAG > Chair) asked me today to confirm that we did what we promised in the email below. > >> There was general agreement that the author-only view of the main >> spec, > plus a commitment to maintain it and improve its quality, was > sufficient as a normative reference. > > Useful references for this discussion are: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/59 > > and Mike's action item that produced the first PWD of H:TML > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/168 > > From the current Editor's draft: > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html > >> This specification is available in the following formats: single >> page > HTML <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html>, multipage HTML > <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/spec.html>, web developer edition > <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/author/>. > > The "author-only view" aka "web developer edition" appears to be > available for the current Editors draft but the link that occurs in > the Editors Draft is NOT available in the current TR version at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html5-20101019/. The link was previously > published in the June WD: see > http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html5-20100624/ > > Mike Smith has explained to me that the link was not included on the > last publication cycle since the "author-only view" did not pass > pubrules and he could not get the problems fixed in the time we gave > him to publish the 8 WD specifications. > > Mike and I have created ACTION-190 to track the work needed to solve > this > problem: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/190 > > /paulc > > PS: This is TAG Issue-379. > > Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada > > 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 > > Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Maciej Stachowiak > Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:55 AM > To: HTMLWG WG > Subject: CfC: Close ISSUE-59 normative-language-reference (ends > 2009-12-17) > > At TPAC, we had a joint session with the TAG where we discussed their > interest in having a separate language reference. There was general > agreement that the author-only view of the main spec, plus a > commitment to maintain it and improve its quality, was sufficient as a > normative reference. There was also agreement that Mike's document > would be useful and beneficial as a non-normative reference guide to > the syntax. Therefore, it seems there is no more controversy over > ISSUE-59, and we should close it by amicable resolution. > > If there are no objections, this issue will be closed on December 17, 2009. > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/59 > > Regards, > > Maciej >
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 14:02:44 UTC