- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:17:21 +0100
- To: "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Cc: public-w3process@w3.org
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 15:59:05 +0100, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote: > On Friday, February 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Robin Berjon wrote: > >> I think that this ties in with the issue that when you find yourself on >> a dated TR version, nothing tells you if it's the latest and greatest >> or not. Ideally, every W3C specification should be published with a >> small bit of JS that asks if it's the latest and very obviously flags >> itself as obsolete if it is not. That would work nicely for copied >> documents as well. > > Sure, but how do we solve the issue of people not reading the warning? Same way we solve the issue of people who are implementing not reading the spec (or half reading it, or thinking that it is fine to do anything that a lawyer can argue convincingly is justified by a careful interpretation of the spec, without reference to whether it makes sense)... We don't. We solve some of the issues that such people cause, by telling them afterwards that they have done the wrong thing, or by fixing all the other implementations and new versions of the spec to cope with whatever they broke, or we throw away a few million dollars worth of investment and do something else. And we hope people *do* read stuff more often, because if they don't then there really isn't anything good we can do about it. That's life. cheers -- Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Saturday, 4 February 2012 17:17:54 UTC