W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > October 2014

Re: Proposal for Publishing REC Errata

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:44:44 -0400
Message-ID: <543EF8DC.8050300@gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 10/14/14 10:32 PM, fantasai wrote:
> A. Write in the errata as diff marks (using <ins> and <del>) in the
>      spec. Maintain a separate list similar to a DoC explaining
>      the changes, and possibly also tracking the status of their tests
>      and impls.

I like this proposal (possibly using a special stylesheet to accentuate 
the changes)!

Errata are a PIA and I can't think of any important stakeholder that 
`wins` by using a separate document. Why can't we run a live experiment 
and try this and if/when the changes get too cumbersome, then we have a 
few options to pursue.

(I'd be more than happy to be the guinea pig with the Touch Events REC 
that needs some errata.)

Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2014 22:45:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:22 UTC