W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver-editors@w3.org > November 2020

Re: Suggested shortnames for Silver

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:03:43 -0500
To: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, AGWG Chairs <group-ag-chairs@w3.org>, Silver Editors <public-silver-editors@w3.org>
Message-ID: <b57a8a04-9052-f1b6-9fe3-a4d2eca95553@w3.org>
Thank you for bringing this up Michael.

We had a similar question from Kaz related to the WoT documents 20 days
ago and I took an action to provide clarifications.

Here is what I wrote then:

In other words, the pattern followed by WCAG so far matches the patterns
that are in other groups.

Can you comment on that issue?

So ar, I haven't encounter strong opinions on this issue but we didn't
circulate it widely either.


On 11/4/2020 7:58 AM, Michael Cooper wrote:
> Up to now, we've been kind of assuming Silver (WCAG 3) will have a
> shortname patterned like WCAG 2. (The shortname is the part that appears
> after TR in the URI, sometimes collated with a date, such as
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.) A couple things aren't great about this
> pattern:
>   * Most W3C documents use lowercased shortnames, it's unusual to have
>     an uppercase one.
>   * The lack of punctuation makes it ambiguous whether the version is
>     3.0 or 30.
> I would like to address this by making the shortname for the Silver
> guidelines "wcag-3.0". Thus, the TR publication URI would be
> https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/.
> The Requirements document should follow a similar pattern, though in
> that case I'd like to drop the "dot" from it so it applies to all
> editions of WCAG 3. Therefore the shortname would be
> "wcag-3-requirements" and the TR publication URI
> https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3-requirements/.
> What are your thoughts? I expect Judy and Shawn Henry not to support
> this initially, as they would probably prioritize consistency with the
> past. But I think a once-per-decade major update is the best opportunity
> to break away from that in favour of something more clear. I think the
> increased clarity outweighs consistency with the past. (N.B., we would
> probably set up redirects so if someone tries to go to
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG30/, they would be redirected rather than find
> it a broken link, so we're not breaking things for people used to the
> old pattern.)
> Michael
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2020 15:03:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 4 November 2020 15:03:57 UTC