- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 16:52:48 -0500
- To: "Paul Nelson (ATC)" <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>
- CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>
Paul Nelson (ATC) wrote: > I would like to voice my concern with copies of the spec being placed in > several places. This could quickly become a version control mess. I > understand the desire to be open, but then the CSS 2.1 spec is already > published to the public. I think it's not a serious issue right now, but as we acquire more errata it could become more important to have the edited copy available. I remember working with REC-CSS2 + Errata before CSS2.1 was first published, and it's very easy to forget to check the errata when checking tests and implementations against the spec. For the versioning mess issue -- for cases like CSS Namespaces where I've moved the master copy to dev.w3.org, I've replaced the internal copy with a pointer to the new location. In other cases like CSS3 Paged Media, where the master copy is our internal copy, I've left it alone and dev.w3.org is just a place to publish interim Editors' Drafts for reference and commenting by the public. No edits are made to the dev.w3.org version: it's always copied directly from the internal version. For CSS2.1 I'd suggest this second route. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2007 21:53:06 UTC