- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: 09 Jun 2003 11:42:39 -0400
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 20:04, Tim Bray wrote: > Will soon show up at http://www.tbray.org/tag/wa-c4.html. Since I wrote > it on a plane, I didn't get around to embedding URIs for all the RFC and > other references. So this definitely needs an editing pass. There are > placeholders for text from Chris on form/content/interaction, and from > Norm on embedding hyperlinks. Lots more editing is required. Hi Tim, Thanks for writing this. I have a couple of thoughts: 1) I would like to see the text highlight what is most relevant to the Web (Architecture). You do this in a number of places: - In 4.1: register your MIME types - In 4.4: use URI refs as identifiers I think that there should be more along those lines, and that text that does not do this should be pruned (or made more Web-relevant). For example, why is statement about the importance of well-specified error-handling specific to the Web Arch? Is there something about the Web that makes a particular kind of error handling important? Similarly, what is it about the Web that most affects one choice between a binary or a text format? I certainly don't mind using the categories you've suggested, but I think the text should be more specific to the Web. 2) A number of the sections should have references to relevant TAG issues (e.g., link to binaryXML-30 in section in binary v. textual). - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 9 June 2003 11:42:43 UTC