W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: Editor's drafts on /TR/ ftw, was Re: new TR tools and editor's drafts?

From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 13:24:49 +0000
To: <plh@w3.org>
CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <w3c@marcosc.com>, <spec-prod@w3.org>, <dsr@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1CB2E0B458B211478C85E11A404A2B2701C15CE6@008-AM1MPN1-034.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Are we are conflating discovery with "living specs"?

Editors drafts should be allowed to be broken, etc as they are just that, editor drafts and should be separate from "approved" "authoritative" material - there is value in being able to reference approved material.  Thus there is no logical reason to put them in TR other than to have a single repository.  Given the use of links I'm not sure that consistency of storage location is a major requirement.

Currently TR drafts have links to the editors draft. 

I'm probably missing something in this discussion, but it seems like the "living spec" discussion again.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Jun 24, 2013, at 2:59 PM, ext Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 14:05 +0100, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> Again, it would be amazing if we could put Editor's drafts on /TR/. The only things that Editor's drafts would need to include is:  
>> 
>> 1. links to IPR relevant versions for the lawyers, including FPWD and any Lawyer Call (LC) and any Rec.  
> 
> ok
> 
>> 2. Make sure that quality is maintained (PubRules must pass, including copyright, disclosure links, valid markup, valid CSS, no broken links, etc., etc.)
> 
> I'm worried about having such restriction on editor's drafts. A large
> number of publication we're receiving has some errors (in general,
> markup and/or broken links). I would bet that most of the editors'
> drafts are broken in some fashion, and that's ok imho. In other words, I
> would favor a more relax approach for editors' draft than for formal
> publications.

+1 , an editors draft is just that

> 
>> It could be a kind of continuous integration thing  or a two click "check my spec!" -> If all good? "Click here to put it on TR!".  
> 
> Yes, but that's not going to happen in the short term. We made progress
> on automation but those are only visible to the webmaster for the
> moment. In addition, the webmaster is still facing a lot of exceptions
> that he has to deal with manually (shortnames changes for example).
> 
> Philippe
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 13:26:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:18 UTC