Re: request a heartbeat publication of HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives

Hi John,
I think that it may be you are laboring under a misapprehension that it has
been suggest that the heartbeat WD be published as a living doc.

If so I am unclear where you got the idea. But it has not been suggested to
my knowledge. The Editors draft has been pointed to as the point of origin
for the heartbeat Working Draft, but a WD is a dated snapshot of the
editors draft not a pointer to the editors draft.

There is nothing new or different here.
this information may make it clear
https://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/wg/WorkMode#The_Technical_Reports_Process_.28What_is_an_Editor.27s_Draft.3F.29

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 14 October 2014 17:20, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:

> Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps this will help.  Here is a log of commits:
> >
> > https://github.com/w3c/alt-techniques/commits/master
> >
> > Here is a way to reference a stable snapshot:
> >
> > https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/alt-techniques/955c8e6/index.html
> >
> > Note the "955c8e6" references a specific commit.  You can find the
> > number associated with a commit by going to the first link.
> >
> > If/when a heartbeat is published, the date will be a part of the
> > content and a part of the link.
>
>
> Thank you for this Sam. While this is indeed useful to me, I think it adds
> an additional layer of complexity for the non-initiated, and is frankly not
> a very scalable solution for the hundreds of thousands of potential content
> authors that are just looking for "the latest word" on how to create good
> text alternatives.
>
> While it is not my intent to hold up progress or frustrate the 'publishing'
> process on this document, I think this current issue also underscores a
> question I posed a month ago: "Who is Joe Developer?"
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2014Sep/0029.html)
>
> I can state categorically that I work with a large number of content
> creators and other "authoring-types" on a daily basis, and I can certainly
> assure you that they don't know a Git from a Xit. As this Working Group
> (and
> in fact the W3C overall) contemplates moving towards a new and different
> 'publishing model' I urge us all to remember that we are not shipping
> software here, we are writing and publishing standards, and the audience
> for
> that content is far larger and wider than just engineers who are used to
> pulling and pushing commits as part of their day-to-day activities. Asking
> these constituents to monitor multiple URLs just to be sure of which
> reference they are referencing places a burden on those who should least
> have to carry that burden IMO.
>
> As noted earlier, I believe this will certainly be a topic of discussion
> during TPAC, so I don't expect an answer now, but felt it was worth
> re-surfacing none-the-less.
>
> Cheers!
>
> JF
>
>
>
>