- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 07:48:49 -0400
- To: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
- CC: "public-touchevents@w3.org" <public-touchevents@w3.org>
On 4/13/15 5:21 PM, Rick Byers wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com > <mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi All, > > The errata for the Touch Events REC [1] is still mostly empty and > it contains what I would characterize as a somewhat surprising > statement: > > [[ > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-touch-events-20131010/REC-touch-events-20131010-errata.html> > ... > > An updated specification will be located at WebPlatform Specs. > ]] > > I say "surprising" because I don't recall us agreeing to publish > an update at specs.webplatform.org <http://specs.webplatform.org>. > Would someone please clarify? > > > IIRC Doug said that was the new preferred path for publishing errata > the last time we discussed the errata process on a call. Perhaps > "updated specification" is misleading though :-) > > Anyhow, what, if anything should be added to the errata document? > Does the CG have consensus about text for the errata document? > Alternatively, perhaps the errata document could link to a version > of the spec that is the REC + agreed errata text (all inlined, and > perhaps styled such all of the changes from the REC are very > clearly identifiable and enumerated in the Changes Since last Pub > section)? > > > Personally, I think having a document that is the REC + agreed > errata changes is more useful than adding text to the errata document. > > > I like that plan too. From our recent call though it sounds like some > of the 'errata' changes we've made may need to be considered > normative. Eg. fractional co-ordinates. That one change alone is > important enough to me (and, IMHO, the platform) that I wouldn't want > to let it fall through the cracks. So perhaps we should be talking > more about publishing a minor v1.1 update instead of worrying about > errata? Yes, I think the consensus is to put all of the changes in a single document and then Doug and I (and anyone interested in the `sausage making`) will figure out how to get that doc published as a Technical Report. BTW, what is the rough status and plan of that document (perhaps we should call it TE Level 2)? Have all of the changes we want to make been added to one of the branches (and if yes, which branch)? Do we want to block publication pending more feedback from implementations and deployment? I noticed there are some open issues <https://github.com/w3c/touch-events/issues>. -Thanks, AB
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 2015 11:49:38 UTC