Nathan, Le 15 févr. 2011 à 07:27, Nathan a écrit : > It would be great to see the two approaches balanced such that announcements > are made like "HTML has just been updated, features a,b have been added, bugs > h,j,k have been fixed and z has been deprecated".
What would be the criteria for these features? There are many possible ways of * Interoperability tables? http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Implementations_in_Web_browsers http://caniuse.com/ * Under Patent Policy? # Small feature specifications (extracted from the OpenWeb "wiki" specification which is HTML living standard.) * Benefits: - Easier, quick to publish - can be put in shape (not the content) by someone else - small target for test suites - small target for interoperability reports - easier to publish tutorials * Drawbacks: - reference and dependencies hells. - consistency: easier to publish comes with we need to be quicker to fix an error. - more legacy documents around after a few years/months - IANAL. Patent policy not designed?, set up for this kind of things. - W3C staff work more difficult (publishing, announcements) in a limited resources environment. (Can be fixed) -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
