- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:24:06 +0100
- To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- CC: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 2012-01-26 21:52, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > Larry Masinter<masinter@adobe.com>, 2012-01-26 05:52 -0800: > >> this html-wg issue concerns whether an undated url reference to another >> specification is labeled as "work in progress" so that reviewers are >> alerted to the loose binding. >> >> is that just a matter of taste with no substance? > > Maybe you can point out to me how actual behavior of conforming UAs that > implement the spec would be affected by the proposed change. > > If you have time, maybe you can look at the following and point out what > effect its resolution would have on conforming UAs - > > Consider reducing verbosity when talking about code points > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11124 > > The change proposed there requires literally hundreds of edits to the > current spec. It has no impact on conforming UAs. It does have impact on the readability of the spec. Example: the spec currently contains 36 instances of "U+0030 DIGIT ZERO (0) to U+0039 DIGIT NINE (9)" Part of the proposal is to define "ASCII digit" once, and use it throughout (BTW: that's something that can be done mechanically). Similarly, defining "uppercase ASCII letters" and "lowercase ASCII letter" would make the spec more readable. Also, I'd like to point out that I wouldn't have raised this issue unless *others* wouldn't have complained it as well: <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11124#c1> Also, if you look at the bug, you'll notice that several people agreed that reducing verbosity would be good. I realize that you either disagree that this affects the readability of the spec, or that you think that it doesn't matter. But please respect that others have a different opinion. Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 21:24:48 UTC