Hi Ian, Cameron,
I asked Ian Jacobs to clarify the W3C's Referencing Policy in the
context of this thread (i.e. "referring to unstable drafts") and
this is what he reported:
[[
Here is the text [from the W3C Manual of Style]:
<http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#normative>
"Normative references should be to stable and mature resources (e.g.,
only Recommendations)."
Thus, it is not forbidden. Especially when a document is a draft, it
seems unproblematic. The Manual of Style also says:
'If a reference is a W3C Recommendation track technical report that
has not reached Recommendation, state in the References section
that
it is "work in progress."'
Once the document becomes a Proposed Recommendation, it is ill-advised
to refer to an instable document, as the group is likely to have to wait
until the unstable reference becomes a Proposed Recommendation before it
can continue to advance.
]]
Art
---
On Jan 8, 2007, at 6:19 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Cameron McCormack wrote:
1.3 Security Concerns
=====================
XBL prevents this by requiring that the cookie attribute on the
DocumentWindow interface be set to null.
Should there be a reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/Window/ there?
W3C process doesn't allow us to refer to unstable drafts, as I
understand
it, so I don't think we can do that.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )
\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _
\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--
(,_..'`-.;.'
