Re: [TR] Status Section Requirements

On 10/31/2013 03:31 AM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> This is a section dear to my heart. [...]
> That is the spirit I suspect of the process document
> document's requirement to have a paragraph which is unique.
> Yes, you have to think, and that adds effort to publishing
> a document.

I think that spirit is not captured in the requirements here
at all. :)

>> Second Issue
>> ------------
>>
>> 1 is generally not followed. Most status sections are complete
>> boilerplate. Even if they weren't, it's hard to come up with some
>> reason to write something unique and different every time the
>> document is published.
>
> On the other hand it is really valuable to tell a reader
> exactly what is different, however minor and trite --
> if the status has not changed, why publish

This is what the Changes section is for. It's at the bottom of the
CSS specs for a reason: if you're looking for it, you'll find it
easily from the TOC (maybe even easier once we have a better document
template), but if you just landed here for actual information, you
start with interesting things rather than a list of differences
from the previous version (which is only interesting to someone
who has done a detailed study of the previous version).

> "Fix typos" sounds good comment to me.
> Tells me not to read it if I read the last one.
> Really valuable comment.

Sure. Should go in the Changes section. It's not anything about
the "status of *this* document", it's about the difference between
the previous version and this. So should go in the section
dedicated to explaining that difference and in the announcement of
the publication in the news.

~fantasai

Received on Thursday, 31 October 2013 21:09:27 UTC