I am seriously considering adopting [1]doc-html-w3. I use many of these recommendation on a daily basis where I work. It would be nice to have a current local copy of them. However, before I decide to go any further with the adoption process, I want to get some feedback for an idea that I have.
I would like to change doc-html-w3's name to one that is more descriptive of its current and potential contents. I think that the name of this package is currently too narrow; besides HTML, indicated by the name, it also contains CSS2, SMIL, XPATH and many other recommendations. What do you think? Here are a couple of the names I've been kicking around: a) doc-w3 (most general, my favorite; perhaps even doc-w3c) b) doc-markup-w3 (but this name excludes style: CSS2, XSLT, etc) c) doc-w3c-recommend d) [your suggestion here] Feel free to CC me, thanks. Joe Schlecht [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=no\&bug=110945