W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: YA proposal to bring /TR/ into the 21st century

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:50:42 -0500
Cc: shane@aptest.com, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Message-Id: <2899EAFE-FFE2-4D00-B423-C31B3CA4EE8E@w3.org>
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>

On Oct 28, 2013, at 12:25 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:

> On 2013/10/22 3:02, Ian Jacobs wrote:
>> On Oct 21, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Shane McCarron<ahby@aptest.com>  wrote:
>>> Hmm.  I think it is important that TR/short-name/ continue to work as it has.  The industry knows this is where you go to find specs, and I wouldn't want to have to *decide* which one to read.  On the other hand, I think a convention that was TR/short-name/menu or list or something would be great!   A standardized way to get to the list of all versions of a spec
>> We have that today for all specs. Click on the date on the TR page. Example:
>>  http://www.w3.org/standards/history/css-cascade-3
> That page shows "Retired" at the bottom. What does that mean? I can't imagine a spec that went to CR on 2013-10-03 to be retired already.

Retired means "The group told us they don't intend to pursue it but are not yet ready to publish an end Note."

Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                                          +1 718 260 9447
Received on Monday, 28 October 2013 13:51:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 28 October 2013 13:51:16 UTC