W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > September 2013

Re: Questions/Comments on the current Compliance Spec Draft

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 14:29:13 -0700
Message-id: <2CDBB04D-46F3-4886-A910-7F84665C65C8@apple.com>
To: "public-tracking@w3.org List" <public-tracking@w3.org>
For the purposes of Vinay's message, I merely tried to sift out the changes that were purely editorial.

For the non-editorial matters, I merely follow directions; perhaps I was wrong in suggesting that they should be 'issues'.

On Sep 23, 2013, at 13:32 , "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> On Sep 23, 2013, at 11:39 AM, David Singer wrote:
>> Hi Vinay, friends
>> Matthias asked me to take a look, as one of the editing team, and suggest what was editorial and what you should probably raise an issue about.
> The goal of this short-term exercise is to fix at least some of
> the editorial mistakes that were made in crafting the June draft,
> including the arbitrary addition of non-editorial text,
> that should have been fixed prior to WD publication just like
> we have for all of our prior WDs.
> In other words, there are editorial ways to address the objections
> to publication of the WD, and accomplishing that in short order is
> what was promised by the chair.  Those changes are not necessarily
> editorial in nature.
> The fix is either to change the text as requested, add a
> parallel option text in the draft (with option boxes), or
> remove the current text from the draft pending issue resolution.
> If it is editorial (and most are), then changing the text is
> easiest.  Otherwise, I prefer options boxes over removing the
> old text, since the latter causes more editorial churn.
> ....Roy

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 21:29:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:39:56 UTC