On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote: > > On July 14, 2014 at 3:40:41 PM, Frederick Hirsch (w3c@fjhirsch.com) wrote: > > How much chance of breakage is there with old documents assuming old > interfaces (in particular > > for ReSpec)? My tentative answer is that ReSpec has stabilized since the > big update Robin > > made ages ago (which did have some upgrade issues, as expected given the > newness of the > > entire endeavor). > > Yeah, the chance is it's pretty minor. It's likely that specs that are > still using the old version of Respec are dead specs anyway (so it's > unlikely that it would cause any problems). > That's a bold statement. It could also be a simple spec that is stable enough and does not really need extra work. I don't actually mind having to "compile" the spec every time I load it (although the delay is quite annoying) but the attitude that specs can break because they all point to the same respec version doesn't sound right. While I haven't seen any spec breakages so far, at some point some respec change will definitely break some old frozen spec if we all hot link to one live version. If we are to suggest groups to just publish the source document, there should be milestone/version copies for finalized specs to refer to, so they can't break. Or just keep on publishing static HTML. Putting aside all the comments above, static HTML documents are more spider friendly. -- Sangwhan Moon [Opera Software ASA] Software Engineer | Tokyo, Japan
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 03:36:38 UTC