Re: [admin] XHR ED Boilerplate

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> 
> Here's what I did for the URL spec re the boilerplate to help address 
> the "attribution issue" re Anne and WHATWG:
> 
> <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/url/raw-file/tip/Overview.html> [...]

That's pretty good, though the Status of this Document boilerplate other 
than the green note seems kinda contradictory. For example:

   "This is the 8 November 2012 draft of the URL standard."

...should probably say something more like:

   "This is a copy of the WHATWG URL standard as of 8 November 2012."

Similarly, it says:

   "This document is maintained by the Web Applications (WebApps) Working 
   Group."

...which should probably say something more like:

   "This document is maintained by the WHATWG and copied by the Web 
   Applications (WebApps) Working Group."

...or some such. The next paragraph starts in a similarly misleading way:

   "This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 
   2004 W3C Patent Policy."

A more accurate statement would be:

   "This document was produced by the WHATWG and then republished by a 
   group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy."

Also, the document asks for feedback on the public-webapps list, but that 
fragments feedback on the spec; the WHATWG copy instead suggests feedback 
go to the WHATWG list.

The change to the heading, moving Anne from "Author" to "Editor", makes 
some of the text in the spec, e.g. the note saying "As the editor learns 
more about the subject matter the goals might increase in scope somewhat", 
somewhat confusing.


What I don't really understand, though, is why any of this is needed at 
all. What value is the W3C adding by creating these forks?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 21:22:40 UTC