07.11.2014, 17:53, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>: > On 11/07/2014 09:01 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: >> šOn 11/7/14 8:48 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> šOn Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> š[Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/fullscreen/raw-file/default/TR.html >>> šIt would be nice if editor's draft points to https://fullscreen.spec.whatwg.org/ >> šThat would be OK with me but as a W3C TR I'm not sure if that is permitted or not. >> šYves, Cindy, PLH - can we do as Anne suggests? > > I'm pretty sure there is no rule against pointing to another spec in a Note. >> šI suppose another option is to remove the Editor's Draft from the boilerplate. > > It probably makes sense to do that anyway. They should both point to the > currently-maintained draft. Yeah, the point is that we are not maintaining a draft and WHAT-WG are. So we do the world a service by pointing to that, and no service by avoiding it. And I don't know of a rule that says we cannot do that. It isn't a normative reference, it's just a link to useful information. cheers -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.comReceived on Friday, 7 November 2014 17:58:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:51:49 UTC