- From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:41:30 +0200
- To: public-qa-dev@w3.org
- Cc: "www-validator Community" <www-validator@w3.org>
On Thursday 19 March 2009, olivier Thereaux wrote: [...] > After a long discussion with w3c-legal, I would like to suggest the > following conclusions: [...] > I started changes to that effect in the link checker today. Ville, > would you be able to review the changes and tell me if you think they > make sense? There are a few things I'd like to see done/clarified: 1) docs/checklink.html still has a reference to ../images/valid_icons/valid-xhtml10-blue.png. Maybe get rid of the whole validity badge there? Or use an absolute URL to the one on validator.w3.org. 2) images/w3c.png still exists in CVS, and bin/checklink and docs/checklink.html still refer to it instead of no_w3c.png. The easiest solution would seem to be to overwrite images/w3c.png with the current images/no_w3c.png (and revert the related changes to MANIFEST and SIGNATURE). On the other hand this will lead to local installations displaying the online w3c.png which is the "real" W3C logo by default - IIUC this was not desirable. Another solution would be to change bin/checklink and docs/checklink.html in CVS to refer to no_w3c.png, and customize the version running on official validator servers to refer to w3c.png instead (or to make sure no_w3c.png is actually the real w3c.png there). This way images/w3c.png could stay in CVS, it'd just not end up in the dist tarball. 3) images/no_w3c.png is missing from MANIFEST and SIGNATURE, but fixing this depends on how 2) above is solved (and SIGNATURE will be autogenerated anyway, no need to modify it except when finalizing a release).
Received on Monday, 23 March 2009 19:42:16 UTC