Re: Obsolescence notices on old specifications, again

* Glenn Adams wrote:
>That doesn't really work for me. What would work for me is something like:
>"Although DOM Level 2 continues to be subject to Errata
>it is no longer being actively maintained. Content authors and implementers
>are encouraged to consider the use of newer formulations of the Document
>Object Model, including DOM4 <>, which is
>currently in process for Advancing a Technical Report to

The point is to say something along the lines of "If this document
contains errors, or text that is often misunderstood, do not expect
corrections or clarifications to appear here or in the associated
errata document, you are more likely to find them $elsewhere". The
W3C Process requires Working Groups to keep the errata document up
to date and to keep their Recommendations up do date by applying
errata to the Recommendations and publishing them through the PER
process. That is "Errata Management" as far as I would understand
the term, and the Working Group wishes to convey they won't do so.

The document would be "subject to Errata Management" only in so far
as that publishing such a note would not remove the option for the
Working Group to change its mind, but that is not useful information
for people the note would be addressed to: if the group did change
its mind, it can just update the note, new readers would get up to
date information, and people who read the note long ago would require
a note at $elsewhere to learn about new developments at the old lo-
cation. That the Working Group might change its mind they would al-
ready know due to the note being there in the first place.
Björn Höhrmann · ·
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 ·
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · 

Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 02:34:34 UTC