- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:18:53 -0500
- To: "Vickers, Mark" <Mark_Vickers@cable.comcast.com>
- Cc: "site-comments@w3.org" <site-comments@w3.org>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Hi Mark, Thanks for the feedback. I recall adding a bunch of anchors to the CG process: http://www.w3.org/community/about/ I'll take your advice and go add some for the cg legal agreements. Ian On 17 May 2012, at 4:05 PM, Vickers, Mark wrote: > In discussions with W3C legal staff and member legal staff about W3C agreements, a nice feature of some W3C agreements is that we can pass a link to a specific section of those agreements, e.g. > > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-exclusion-resign > > However, the availability of internal links in W3C agreements seems to be very inconsistent, in three categories: > > 1.. Visible links: The best agreements have a Table of Contents and clickable links in sections: > > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-exclusion-resign > > 2. Hidden links: Other agreements have no visible links, but the underlying document has id attributes which can be used for linking, but only by the technically savvy: > > http://www.w3.org/2009/12/Member-Agreement#terms > > 3. No links: Some agreements have no internal links at all: > > http://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/cla/ > > It's disappointing that the more recent agreement for CGs is the least linkable! > > It would be great if all W3C agreements were republished consistently, with visible links to each numbered section. > > Note that this is not the highest-priority request. > > Thanks, > mav > > > > -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 19:18:57 UTC