- From: Carr, Wayne <wayne.carr@intel.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 19:33:11 +0000
- To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
>Instead of an ugly ignorable warning, you prepend "Obsolete" to the spec's title, >you make the background light grey, you change the top left W3C strip to grey, >you bold the "Latest Version" link. The most practical would be to detect that in >JS. Altering old publications that are obsolete to say obsolete is a good idea. IETF does that, don't they? So only the latest version in TR would not say obsolete. If a draft was abandoned before getting to REC, it could also be marked obsolete with a note that no further work was being done on that particular draft. Along with this, if it is easy enough to publish a heartbeat draft, those could be done more frequently so not be so far out of touch with the editors draft. With anything without WG consensus marked as provisional. It doesn't seem like any of this would require process doc changes (it doesn't conflict with the process). Seems, the w3c staff could just agree to start doing it.
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 19:33:47 UTC