RE: 13 Aug Arch Doc available for review (skw-...01)

On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 04:38, Williams, Stuart wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Connolly []
> > Sent: 14 August 2002 19:31
> > Could you be more specific/concrete about what you want this stuff
> > up front to say?
> Ok... so this is mostly a matter of style and tastes vary.... there is
> likely no 'right' answer.
> Early on in the life of the TAG you had spoken about the 1-pager on Web
> Architecture, the 5-pager, the 5-sections/chapters, the 5 volumes.... well
> you weren't particular about 5, but the thing that you described had a
> fractal quality. I would like our document to exhibit some of those
> qualities.

Ah; now I see what you mean. OK, yes...

> So... to be concrete:
> I really like the Introduction - the one paragraph and an enumerated list of
> 3 items. I wouldn't place anything before that.

Yes, I agree.
(Sorry I neglected to say that when I launched in with my suggested

> I think I'd add an extra section to the introduction ahead of Chapter 1 and
> maybe ahead of "Limitations of this document" that introduced the concept of
> the principles of Web Architecture and simply catalogued them either
> organised under the three sub-tiles of Identifiers, Formats, and Protocols
> or in some (partial-) order of most to least fundemental... (although I
> guess maybe agreeing such an ordering might be fraught and unnecessary). At
> this point I would not decorate the principles with any more than a sentence
> or two expressing its import or acknowledging controversy. But for the whole
> section I would set up the promise of deeper motivation, justification,
> explaination later in the document.

OK, yes, I like that idea.

Dan Connolly, W3C

Received on Thursday, 15 August 2002 15:08:24 UTC