Re: noting editorial changes to documents

> On Feb 10, 2023, at 4:13 AM, Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/02/2023 10:42, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/02/2023 23:52, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
>>>> On Feb 9, 2023, at 3:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I see that even typographical changes are noted in the changes sections.  It seems to me that this is overkill.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I suggest that fixing typographical errors and other minor editorial changes not be noted change sections.
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>>> +1 The historical change logs may have included this. I erred on the side of including both historical change logs and contributors, but arguably, these can be trimmed back, at least the change log. IMO, only normative or large structural changes need to be added to the change log.
>> 
>> Aren't these changes sections for the formal steps of CR->PR->REC (external review points) which do need to be noted?
> Process-wise, we are working on first public working drafts, so I don't think we are required to log the changes we make w.r.t. the previous REC.

Those changes were necessary in the RDF 1.1 version as it was transitioning. Arguably, there’s really no need to keep that change log in the 1.2 document, as you can always go back to see it (particularly for the detailed transition bits). I think keeping a summary of those earlier changes is useful, but can/should be edited.

>> 
>> Non-trivial, non-normative should be noted for this WG at least because of the charter.  I don't think we will have many such items.
> 
> Agreed. But this can be documented in the rdf-new document, IMO.
> 
> See for example :
> 
> https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#changes

Yes, some specs used that pattern, but I think it’s better to keep a set of changes in the document.

Note that ReSpec has support (of course) for managing this for you through a range of commit dates using the commit messages [1], but I don’t think that’s as useful as hand-written entries. It might be useful for the post-transition phase, though.

Gregg

[1] https://github.com/w3c/respec/wiki/rs-changelog

>   pa
> 
>> 
>>     Andy
>> 
>>> 
>>> Gregg
>>>> 
>>>> peter
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> <OpenPGP_0x9D1EDAEEEF98D438.asc>