- From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:35:35 +0100 (IST)
- To: public-ppl@w3.org
On Sat, April 14, 2012 4:01 pm, David Carlisle wrote: > On 13/04/2012 22:44, Tony Graham wrote: >> Personally, I don't see that the W3C is set up for CGs to write a spec >> in >> the absence of a WG to take it over and bless it. For starters, CGs >> don't >> come with CVS or Mercurial access on the W3C servers so it would be >> harder >> for a CG to do things that fit into the regular spec-production >> processes. > > Is that necessarily true? xml-er is similarly a CG and it has > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xml-er/raw-file/tip/Overview.html > > admittedly Anne works for a member company and is a member of several WG > in addition to the CG but the draft is under the control of a CG. I was building up to a wonderful discussion of how the W3C wasn't set up for CGs to host code, etc., but either I missed it before or it's been recently added and the 'Tools and Infrastructure' page [1] does state that a CG can get an issue tracking tool and/or a Mercurial repository on request. We'd also have to make public the spec's DTD and the stylesheets for turning the spec XML into HTML, but I don't see any technical issue with doing that. Regards, Tony. (Back in the office after two weeks of travel) [1] http://www.w3.org/community/about/tool/
Received on Monday, 16 April 2012 12:36:24 UTC