- 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