- From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:17:01 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
- Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
22.09.2014, 13:32, "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org>: > On 18/09/2014 19:50 , Frederick Hirsch wrote: >> šproposal is to go from using versioned documents to saying that >> ševerything that is found at a well-defined location is the current >> šliving standard. >> >> šThus an update to the standard consists of adding or updating >> šmaterial to be found at the location (modular) >> >> šdid I get this right? > > I think you're trying to summarise this too much! And more specifically, no, I think you got it wrong. As I understand it, the proposal is: + continue publishing stabilised documents, while making the absolute-breathlessly-latest-most-modern-ever (or "living") version easily available and findable + Recognise that there are a number of documents that make up what we think of as "HTML". + Increase that number by splitting the current 1000+ page spec called "HTML5" into a few more manageable pieces. + Having a document that functions a bit like a table of contents, but which points to a number of different specifications, rather than just different chapters or sub-sections of the one monstrous document In other words, imagine that we made some chapters of HTML into separate specifications, but the "contents page" included them as first-class parts of the content of the "HTML Spec", rather than just normative reference documents. Given that we already have to deal with the integration of the stuff on pages 20-45 with the stuff on pages 1045-1060 (and all the stuff in between), and that the process doesn't work perfectly, I think the biggest real impact is that chapters will turn into specifications with memorable names and a manageable size. It is already the case that they are developed at different speeds and there are differing amounts of stability and implementation, on a far more granular level, so that's not a big deal in practice as far as I can tell. And Amen! Hear hear! +lots!!1! to Robin's frustration with the idea that only one or the other matter in the "real world". The real world is quite a complex and diverse place, and needs lots of things. cheers Chaals > Some people need up to date living standards, others need stable > releases. I am tired of reading discussions in which people on either > side are angry at people on the other side simply because they live in a > different world that has different use cases. > > As a result, I think that both ought to be available (under a specific > set up that makes it work). This provides a dedicated location for > living stuff, and another for snapshots. Hopefully we can minimise the > friction between the two by making it easier to ship actual standards > much more often, which is good for both IPR reasons and in terms of > avoiding having stale documents around. Call it "evergreen standards" if > you will. > > Note that drafts.wpo is not a standards organisation, it is just a place > where people can work on standards together. Standardisation happens in > the same old way. > > -- > Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 22 September 2014 14:17:36 UTC