W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2017

Re: Editor's notes

From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:16:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAwChxPuQBj7GNnrqiibRJXBhkdeFDRwT96ussZn2A5JY+eH5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, spec-prod@w3.org
On February 24, 2017 at 7:07:49 AM, fantasai
(fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net) wrote:
> If the base styles are to support a distinction it needs
> a) widespread use

We have evidence of this [1]. If you go through the specs there
(skipping the ones that just include "ednote" in the CSS), you will
see that it's indeed used quite a lot (~roughly around 30+ specs) -
and with a few declarations within each spec.

> b) unambiguous semantic distinction (for consistent application)

This is a little vague (not what you are asking for - just that we
know ednotes sit between an issue and note.

> c) a need for distinct styling (because the reader, for some reason, cares)

Right now, the only distinction from notes is that editor's notes get
the mast "EDITOR'S NOTE".

I was actually reviewing the Web Payment Request spec yesterday and
hit one in the Privacy and Security sections [2]. I encourage you to
take a look, because editor's notes can get used for pretty serious
things (and current styling making them look like notes can downplay
the significance - which is also why I tend to agree that ednotes are
"issues).

[1] https://github.com/search?l=HTML&q=org%3Aw3c+class%3Dednote&type=Code
[2] https://w3c.github.io/browser-payment-api/#security-considerations
Received on Friday, 24 February 2017 01:24:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:22 UTC