Re: "Living Standards"

--  
Marcos Caceres


On Friday, February 3, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:07 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
> > Actually, do you have any statistics to support the above?… I assume that bounce rate from the /TR/ version of HTML5 to the dev (Editor) draft is actually quite high thanks to the red note (given it's prominent placement, it's pretty hard to ignore). Only the W3C could tell us definitively as they have the logs (unless you have some magical access to the stats/logs).  
>  
>  
>  
> Frankly, until today I never knew what was written on it. It's just another of those annoying things that show up on web sites. I would be very surprised if it weren't the same for many others.
Ok, what's your alternative then (short of building the warning it into the browser itself ala Geolocation pop-underbar … which would make for a cool spec :) ).  
  
> And as Julian and I have said, this would not have solved your problem.

It may not have solved it, but I'm sure it would have helped. At least it would stop some of the delusion about /TR/ being a "stable" place from which to rip specs from.  

so, one of the main issues remains that there is a false sense that things on /TR/ are stable. That's a central problem and that needs to be addressed more clearly. I know that Pub Rules forces every non-recommendation spec to say: "This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress."  

But it's obviously not working… and man!… if people, like you, are not even reading the big red warning… I don't know what is left except for me to go over to their house, knock on their door, and tell them in person, "Um, would you please stop doing that.".

Received on Friday, 3 February 2012 14:57:25 UTC