Re: Proposal for Publishing REC Errata

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.)

-AB

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