- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 23:41:50 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28015 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> --- (In reply to Liam R E Quin from comment #3) > [personal response] > > | A standard for electrical plugs or railway track isn't much of a > | standard if anyone approaching it had better be a regular attendee > | at the meetings creating it. > > Since we had over 50 implementations of XQuery 1 and XPath 2, I'm not sure > that comments like this are productive. Clearly people outside the Working > Groups were able to implement the specifications. In some cases such people > sent test results, without having previously contacted us. > > That's not to say the documents are perfect and could never be improved. But > they are not as bad as you imply. Personal: Liam I think you took my comment more personally than I ever intended. My point was to illustrate that drafting a document a group understands isn't the same thing as drafting a standard for public consumption. I took great pains to express my appreciation for the work on these documents so I would ask that you re-read my comments as trying to make a useful distinction, if poorly worded. BTW, I never said the documents were "bad," or even implied that. I said readers could read them more easily with specific references between these "coordinated" drafts. Why do you take criticism = bad? Patrick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 16 March 2015 23:41:51 UTC