- From: (wrong string) äper <christoph.paeper@tu-clausthal.de>
- Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:50:47 +0100
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>: > On 11/7/02 12:29 PM, "Kevin Smith" <k.smith@tatnet.com> wrote: >> >> I've often wondered why there's no link to the errata from the affected >> text in the spec. Is there some philosophical reason to /not/ do so? > > Um, because if you were updating the affected text in the spec itself (which > marking it up with hyperlinks would be), then you might as well just fix > text itself. That's what del and ins are for. > Which is what the CSS working group is doing[1]. > > [1] http://w3.org/TR/CSS21 CSS 2.1 goes further than just implementing the errata into CSS 2.0. I agree that it would help to have the errata included directly into the spec, or at least links to it. I understand nevertheless, that it's W3C's policy to not alter specs after release, only supersede them. Anyhow, a CSS 2.0 Second Edition (like XHTML 1.0) with just the errata worked in or a constantly updated version would have been better, IMHO, [than|before] doing a "current browser habit documentation version". Christoph Päper
Received on Friday, 8 November 2002 02:50:48 UTC