- From: Paul Nelson (ATC) <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 05:25:32 -0800
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>
Personally, I would prefer removing the text and putting it in a note now instead of after the draft is sent out. Paul ________________________________ From: www-style-request@w3.org on behalf of fantasai Sent: Wed 2/21/2007 3:57 PM To: 'WWW International'; www-style@w3.org Subject: Re: CSS3 Text - Edit suggestions Grant, Melinda wrote: > > Regarding the question - > >> whether we publish >> with Tibetan justification defined and marked as deprecated, >> or we publish without it and leave people with an archived >> copy of my scratchpad with an incorrect understanding of how >> it works and an incorrect understanding of its usefulness (or >> lack thereof) in modern typesetting. > > Might it be appropriate for an Appendix? Or could the WG publish it as > a Note? I think just publishing our next draft with it included, but marked as "to be deleted" due to its inappropriateness for modern typesetting, should be enough to get the information out there. I think keeping it in an appendix or publishing a Note about it would make it seem important, whereas what we're trying to say is that it's antiquated, not preferred, and does not need to be implemented in a modern publishing system. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 13:28:06 UTC