- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:38:33 -0500
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- CC: Jim Melton <jim.melton@oracle.com>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, chairs@w3.org, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 12/15/2011 5:08 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > I agree. My working assumption is that all specs have bugs, but newer > versions fix old bugs but introduce new ones. Over time, updated specs > may have less bugs and eventually stabilise. No, not foreseeable and avoidable ones. In many cases. Let's say that specification S(V1) references Unicode(V1). Now unicode is updated. In many cases it's crucial that users of S >not< start using that specification with Unicode(V2) until the group responsible for S specifies a way of doing so that's secure and interoperable. For that reason, it may be appropriate for S(V1) to reference specifically Unicode(V1). I should say I'm also a bit concerned about the tone of this discussion. I respect your opinion on these things, Marcos, and it's possible that in some of the cases where we disagree experience may prove you right. Nonetheless, the tone of this interaction seems to be that you are setting out potentially controversial points of view (e.g. of course forward references to specs cause bugs...stuff happens), and are essentially setting them up as the default position for discussion. If you are serving as de-fact editor for a redesign of W3C specification formats and standards, then I think you should solicit opinions on questions like biblio conventions in a more neutral way, and where possible, try to go with the opinion that either commands consensus, or failing that, best matches the full range of current practice. If you have suggestions, that's great. Many of the decisions we've been discussing on this thread are pretty subtle, involve difficult tradeoffs, and have been the subject of long debate by some pretty experienced people for quite awhile. I'd prefer we not come at them in a style of: "surely this is the answer, any problems?" I'd much rather see a short list of options, with as clear a listing as we can get of the pros and cons. Thank you. Noah
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 15:39:06 UTC