Re: [Vector Effects] Minor correction suggestions for the currently available drafts

Hi everyone,


This is an inline response to a post from last year -- 2009/11/30, by
Doug. Sorry for the delay!


(me)
>> I'd say CVS patches are much more appropriate for this sort of
>> feedback (typos, whitespace and markup issues) than providing a long
>> message full of snippets [...]
(Doug)
> Look at it this way: whether you claim that the differences are editorial
> typos or not, we still have to review the changes closely to make sure that
> your CVS patch doesn't introduce any other errors, or accidental or
> deliberate changes that have not been discussed.  If we start accepting CVS
> patches, I'm afraid that a slip might occur, especially when we are busier.
>  Note also that the SVG WG has had problems in the past with some changes
> being lost because of bad CVS configurations.

I agree that patches can become a little tricky in certain situations...


(Doug)
>>>  I'll leave it up to the
>>>  editor, but I would personally much rather see a simple corrected
>>> document
>>>  that could be easily reviewed and copy/pasted if necessary.
(me)
>> If you (or the editor, naturally) prefer that I attach the changed
>> HTML files (I'm not sure if that's what you meant in the first place),
>> of course I'm happy with it too [...]
(Doug)
> CVS patches don't fit well into my current workflow; maybe they work better
> for Chris.  I admit that they are easier for both commentors and editors
> than saying, "In section 3.4, paragraph 2, replace "fo" with "foo" (though
> saying, "remove trailing spaces between the end of sentences and the closing
> tag" or "use a spell-checker" is higher-level and easy to do with a text
> editor).  But for me, even better is a full document that I can visually
> diff with the original, and accept changes per item as I see fit.

As no extra feedback was received from the editor, I'm following your
recommendation and attaching the full text (HTML files, updated as of
this writing). Regarding the higher-level comments, I guess that it
makes more sense as well: I'll try to use that approach next time. :-)


(Doug)
> For what it's worth, having reviewed your proposed patch, I would advise you
> against bothering to correct typos, trailing spaces, etc. in the "Status of
> This Document" boilerplate (those changes get blown away when we prepare the
> document for publication), or in comment blocks that will not make it into
> the final draft (marked in that spec with the class "editor-note").

OK, I'll try to remember that: I'm not into the editorial details yet
and usually, when I start suggesting corrections, I do within the
whole resource. ;-)


> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs

Cheers,
 Helder