- From: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:16:02 +0200
- To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: site-comments@w3.org, chairs@w3.org
Hi Ian, On Oct 14, 2009, at 17:19 , Ian Jacobs wrote: > and from the spec itself (for those that use the new templates) I see that the new templates are only used for Recs at this time. While I generally like and applaud the new site, I'd like to question whether that was the best move to make. Wouldn't, say, WG Notes or long-stalled documents have made a better testing ground? Looking at the reformatted SVG Tiny 1.2 Rec[0] I see a whole host of issues and I really don't think that editing documents that are widely normatively referenced (sometimes legally so) in ways that risk breaking them, or making them unintelligible, is a great idea. I sent a fairly long list of issues about this part of the redesign[1] and few seem to have been considered. While I fully understand that things take time and do support the idea of the new site going live, I'd like to request that the Rec reformatting be withdrawn so that we can work on it further until we have confidence that it's done right. Amongst the more bothering issues, I really don't think that having the logos of Google, Twitter, or Identi.ca on our standards sends the right message. Also, dropping the specific CSS style sheets that had been added renders the documents nigh unreadable — they were added for a good reason. I also note that the SotD has now been sent to the bottom of the document, which sort of compounds my point about its custom paragraph that is discussed in another thread here. I could go on, but I think that's a topic for deeper investigation. Can we please revert this change until it's fixed? [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-SVGTiny12-20090303/ [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2009Apr/0009.html -- Robin Berjon robineko — setting new standards http://robineko.com/
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 16:16:33 UTC