- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:04:46 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28943
Bug ID: 28943
Summary: avoid "nuked"
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: trivial
Priority: P2
Component: DOM
Assignee: annevk@annevk.nl
Reporter: plh@w3.org
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, www-dom@w3.org
Art reminded me about this one, so here is a proper bug.
In
http://www.w3.org/TR/dom/#interface-domerror
[[
On 7/10/14 12:25 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
> The language "nuked from orbit soon" and "will be nuked" needs to be
> rewritten. This level of informality is inappropriate for a W3C REC
> track document. Better to say "expect to be deprecated" or similar.
I agree with this proposal (particularly since "nuke" might not
translate accurately).
> It is annoying that a search for "Warning!" in the document fails (at
> least on Chrome and Firefox) because it is injected from a content
> style property.
This seems a bit like a personal preference to me. As such, I don't
think it should block the LCWD publication although if Glenn created a
PR that was agreeable to Robin, then I don't see any harm in merging it.
> There remains a normative reference to the WHATWG "URL" specification,
> which needs to be resolved before moving to REC. It would be well
> advised to describe the expected process for doing this in the SoTD
> section.
I don't think this point should block publication of a LCWD. (I also
think the reference policy [1] describes a way to handle this for
subsequent publications.)
]]
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 13 July 2015 15:04:50 UTC