- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 08:47:52 +0200
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net)" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com)" <mjs@apple.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org)" <plh@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)" <mike@w3.org>
On 2011-05-18 01:31, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On May 17, 2011, at 3:02 PM, Paul Cotton wrote: > >>> Why are we having a last call poll on a draft that isn't even published yet? >> >> The poll is to permit WG members to express their position on whether each candidate document should be moved to Last Call Working Draft status. We have provided a link to each document for your review. The documents are linked to in the poll itself and in the announcement message. > > The links are to the editor's draft. Even if there are no changes made > during the polling process, we know that there will be changes made > *after* the poll is complete and the dated links only work for > published drafts. So the external links that I make to sections within > the document as part of my review will be short-lived and confusing > unless I go back and republish the review with updated links to the > new dated documents that are going to be published anyway regardless > of the WG last call decision. Exactly. Note that that editor's draft just gained a normative dependency on CORS (<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html?r1=1.4940&r2=1.4941&f=h>). Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 06:48:23 UTC