- From: Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:20:44 +0300
- To: Jordan Pagels <jordan@realeyes.com>
- Cc: WebPlatform Community <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <D08633B0-89D3-437E-B1F2-C044E606E280@w3.org>
Ok, I think that’s more reasonable too, so that’s what I'm going to do, since nobody else has suggested an alternative. Cheers, Lea Lea Verou W3C developer relations http://w3.org/people/all#lea ✿ http://lea.verou.me ✿ @leaverou On Jul 22, 2013, at 22:26, Jordan Pagels <jordan@realeyes.com> wrote: > For my two cents, I think that the second solution you propose of redirecting to the newest name and including a note with previous names, might be the best. > > It is always amazing what people will manage not to read on the internet, so I think that would help avoid confusion. > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Lea Verou <lea@w3.org> wrote: > This issue is more prevalent with flexbox. Several properties have been renamed over and over during the Working Drafts stage. For example, flex-align to align-items. > > Do we keep separate pages for these, telling people not to use them in the summary and what they’ve been renamed to (such as here [1]) or do we redirect to the newest name, adding a note with older names? > > I used to do the former so far in my cleanup, but it just dawned on me that the latter might be a better approach. > > > [1]: http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/css/properties/-ms-flex-item-align > > Lea Verou > W3C developer relations > http://w3.org/people/all#lea ✿ http://lea.verou.me ✿ @leaverou > > > > > > > > > > -- > [ Jordan Pagels | Creative Developer] > [ RealEyes Media, LLC | www.realeyes.com ] > [ 940 Logan Street | Denver CO, 80203 ] > [ b. www.jpgls.com ] > [ t. @designerJordan ]
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 14:20:58 UTC