- From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2014 20:11:20 +0100
- To: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
08.11.2014, 14:46, "Domenic Denicola" <d@domenic.me>: > From: chaals@yandex-team.ru [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru] >> šThat doesn't work with the way W3C manages its work and paper trails. > > I guess I was just inspired by Mike Smith earlier saying something along the lines of "don't let past practice constrain your thinking as to what can be done in this case," and was hopeful we could come to the even-more-optimal solution. > > In any case, maybe we could also add <meta name="robots" contents="noindex"> to this and previous drafts? I'd object to doing that. While some search engines sometimes provide odd results for queries that match a series of drafts (I know, we're guilty of that too), overall I think it is helpful to be able to find oddities that were in a draft for a while. In particular it supports people doing a little bit of investigation on their own, rather than making it necessary to find someone who was around at the time and can give a clear and comprehensive explanation of how and why a decision was made. Something that *would* make sense to me is to start adding schema.org metadata for documents. And checking that we can e.g. explain that some document is superseded by another one. I'll go put my schema.org hat on and chase that down... cheesr -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Saturday, 8 November 2014 19:11:49 UTC