- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 23:39:09 +0200
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, "David (Standards) Singer" <singer@apple.com>
- CC: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 12/09/2014 15:39 , Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 9/12/14, 8:48 AM, Jeff Jaffe wrote: >> Thanks Boris. So the process issue that we should work on is: >> >> How to motivate the W3C Community and WGs to expeditiously and >> consistently issue errata? Correct? > > That would be a good issue to work on, yes. I heartily agree with Boris but I would like to strengthen the idea further. It is understandable that the first version of a given specification may require time because it often requires banging heads together a fair bit and trying out ideas. However, once there is a sufficiently stable release to start from, it ought to be possible to produce the following iterations in relatively short order, including both errata and progressive addition of features. For sufficiently well established parts of the platform, we ought to be able to issue yearly (or even less) recommendations that simply include the parts that the WG has been working on that happen to be interoperably implemented at that time. It would be better than having to wait n years, having to maintain errata in addition to the improved document, and it would help avoid second-system syndrome. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 12 September 2014 21:39:18 UTC