Re: publishing working drafts; Status of the Document

On Apr 26, 2013, at 1:05 PM, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> On Apr 26, 2013, at 10:26 AM, John Simpson wrote:
> 
>> Apologies.  I'm reading too fast. You do in fact say that it is a streamlined version.  What's not clear to me is whether that status qualifier is intended for both TPE and TCS documents and both will published as Public Working Drafts.
> 
> I think it is for TCS.  I already updated TPE's status section and
> the changes suggested by Nick don't make sense for TPE.

We would be putting a Status of the Document qualifier for both drafts, but Roy is right that the text I proposed there was more appropriate to the TCS document and we should differentiate. I think you're right that we could additionally note that non-normative text has been removed from this draft and may need to be re-introduced in subsequent documents.

> I'm also not clear on the intent to restore some essential non-normative use case explanations.  I think that is essential, as I said in my last message. Removing so much doesn't in my view add clarity to the reader, it confuses him or her … or at least me. 


We seem to have different views from different readers on this point. Personally, I suspect that ultimately we can add some non-normative text inline and some explanatory appendices.

Thanks,
Nick

Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 20:31:43 UTC