- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:27:10 +1200
- To: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>
- CC: public-svg-wg@w3.org
On 3/08/11 1:20 AM, Jonathan Watt wrote:
> I'm not sure why you feel having the "rational" sections inline in the
> spec source would increase the likelihood of that information becoming
> out of date. To me it seems more likely that anyone editing the text
> will see the rational section and update it as necessary too if it's
> inline, rather than in a separate file or wiki page.
OK, maybe I was overstating the risk. We can try doing this. It would
be for:
* changes in normative requirements from SVG 1.1
* changes to new features that based on WG decisions (but not for the
normal evolution of the feature as it is developed)
Does that sound right?
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 00:27:51 UTC