W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: problem with Previous version

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:57:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reFd-xZyKyB=b=aHQX3FnHPfhWyAk+Oekdx-=WSZGk0mWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, "team-rdf-chairs@w3.org" <team-rdf-chairs@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Okay - let's just fix ReSpec to do it right.  I know the line of code to
change.  I will see about creating a pull request.


On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:

>
> On Jun 18, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote:
>
> > Well...  I don't disagree but shouldn't we just fix it?  There is no
> reason for a note to not have a previous version as far as I know.
>
> Notes can be updated (and thus have previous version links).
>
> Ian
>
> >
> > On Jun 18, 2014 2:51 PM, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On June 18, 2014 at 3:30:53 PM, Shane McCarron (shane@aptest.com) wrote:
> > > The reason the previous version is not showing up is that document has
> a
> > > spec status of WG-NOTE. The logic in respec says that if it is a NOTE
> then
> > > do not show the previous version. I don't know why. Robin?
> >
> > I think this has now come up on this list enough time that we should
> consolidate or kill one of them. It's an endless source of confusion. No
> one's fault, obviously! but we should really address this.
> >
> > --
> > Marcos Caceres
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 20:58:20 UTC

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