W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2012

Fwd: Publishing and Linking on the Web

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 14:22:06 -0700
To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <p48ry1eyiwfyo6qf8mtp88a6.1349299321687@email.android.com>
forwarded with permission:


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Publishing and Linking on the Web
From: Alissa Cooper <acooper@cdt.org>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>

Larry, here are some comments on the publishing and linking draft from CDT's staff technologist.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
> Date: October 2, 2012 8:49:54 AM MDT
> Subject: Re: Publishing and Linking on the Web
> I spent 30 minutes looking at this and here are some basic comments; please forward:
> * The "background" section seems to be more of a "problems between legal drafting and how the web actually works". Is the audience for non-techie lawyers? If so, there are a slew of things that will need more explanation that are appropriate for a background section... e.g., "HTTP referrer header" is not something that is painfully obvious to most lawyers... maybe there's a need for a "remedial internet architecture" section (not that title, would be off-putting). Or maybe that's a good goal for another document this one could reference? (In a "This document is an intermediate-level internet architecture document that assumes basic knowledge of how the internet and web works (Please see xx for a basic introduction)."
> * This is a horrible suggestion -- as it would require a ton of work from the authors, so forgive me beforehand for making it: if the audience is lawyers, why not change the structure of the document to be organized in terms of things lawyers that draft Licenses or TOS will care about? That is, instead of talking about different types of, for example, hosting or embedding, how about talk about things that licenses/TOS commonly talk about and then map those on to the web/inet architecture and functionality? So, you'd have a section on "Reproduction", one on "Derivative Works", one on "Harvesting", etc.?
> * There are some drafting typos... e.g., this appears to miss a reference: "HTML supports several different mechanisms for including other web content in a web page. These are listed in , but they all work in basically the same way."
> * It would be great if the "Techniques" section included self-contained examples for popular techniques to accomplish some of those goals.
> best, Joe
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 21:22:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:48 UTC