- From: François Yergeau <francois@yergeau.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 14:27:02 -0700
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
Grosso, Paul a écrit : > ACTION to Francois for this week's telcon: Produce > PER-ready drafts of XML 1.0 4th Ed and XML 1.1 2nd Ed. I've been doing progress on this. I encountered a couple of issues: 1) We need implementation reports for both 1.0 and 1.1. For 1.0 3rd edition, we had http://www.w3.org/XML/2003/09/xml10-3e-implementation.html. So I made up similar URLs, but of course right now they point nowhere. We'll need to attend to that. 2) I'm not sure what to do with the diff markup (colorization) of the changes to 2119 keywords (only MAYs, in fact, IIRC). In 3rd edition when we introduced the keywords, we said so in the status section but did not use any diff markyup in the text. Right now, the situation in both 1.0 4e and 1.1 2e is that all the changes are marked up, and in fact even the MAYs that do not change are marked as changed! This helped with our internal review, but I'm leaning towards doing away with this diff markup -- at the very least that for MAYs that do not change. 2b) If we want to keep the diff markup on the 2119 keywords that do change, then there is the issue of which erratum to point to (all other changes have a link to the proper erratum). Right now we have a PE in the running log, but no officially published erratum for the 2219 changes. We could either make an official erratum and point to it, or keep the colorization but have no link. Opinions? -- François
Received on Monday, 8 May 2006 21:27:00 UTC