- From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:29:36 +0200
- To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Ian B. Jacobs wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 11:09 +0200, Thierry Michel wrote: >> >> I wonder how one can tell if the errata are normative or not. > > It is important to label them "non-normative" on the errata page. > Thank you, I have looked at other errata page and I see that most of them do not mention anything about been "non-normative" for example see http://www.w3.org/2004/01/DOM-Level-3-errata http://www.w3.org/2004/03/voicexml20-errata.html http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-19980512-errata.html http://www.w3.org/2001/10/xmldsig-errata http://www.w3.org/2003/01/REC-SVG11-20030114-errata I could not find anywhere in our W3C process or guidelines, mentioning this "non-normative" on the errata page. Anyway, I propose to add the following text: "These corrections are proposed by the WebCGM Working Group, which has consensus that they are appropriate; they are not to be considered normative until approved by a Call for Review of Proposed Corrections or a Call for Review of an Edited Recommendation". Finally I am curious to understand how this actually works. Does it mean that if one wants to have normative errata page fro a Rec, each time there is a new errata the WG needs to go to a Call for Review of Proposed Corrections and is committed to publish within 6 months a new Edited Recommendation ? > > _ Ian
Received on Friday, 21 September 2007 14:29:22 UTC