- From: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:13:20 -0500
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Cc: public-w3process@w3.org, "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>
Le 5 mars 2012 à 05:49, Charles McCathieNevile a écrit :
> I think a more sensible charaterisation is between a stabilising
> publication process (I'll continue to call this the 'snapshot model' here
> because I doubt that trying to change terms is useful), and one where
> changes can just be thrown in at any time.
May I note that there are both snapshot models with different release paces.
We are building a wall where they should not be, because each community sees the time which matter to them. To build a cathedral, you need(ed) centuries, to build a house a few weeks. I would call it "time for completing actions".
We have different social constraints for our specifications. The time range in between two changes which matter for a community depends on its community.
* Software Engineers
* IT Lawyers
* QA people
* Web developers
* Web marketers
* Physical devices builders
Requirement 3: Identify who and/or what will implement the specification.
— http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#implement-principle
It might be that the different type of crowds will not have to use the specification terms in the same way. W3C specifications have evolved
from a generic description of the technology and a "free to
implementation" on the algorithmic part
to a very precise description almost a "textual reference
implementation"
So each time we talk about the way to publish, maybe we should be talking about time it takes to achieve things for each relevant crowd and how we articulate the flow of information around this more than document themselves which are just representations of an idea.
--
Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations, Opera Software
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 15:13:56 UTC