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

Re: Proposal for Publishing REC Errata

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:55:11 -0400
Message-ID: <543F176F.2070506@inkedblade.net>
To: public-w3process@w3.org
On 10/15/2014 08:39 PM, Stephen Zilles wrote:
>> I believe, Steve, that this is exactly what <ins> and <del> are for. :-)
> [SZ] OK, I see your point. Mine was that if they are used on a whole text
> basis rather than a smallest change basis, the result is much more readable.

While that's true, it also obscures what the actual change was,
making it harder to discern what changed.

We can certainly provide stylesheets to show one view or the other.
I'm not sure about the accessibility of such a display.

Wrt your concern about original text... the original text of a REC
is always available at the dated URL.

Received on Thursday, 16 October 2014 00:55:43 UTC

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