On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Hayato Ito wrote:
I've updated the document on github, using the approved text.
You can see and copy the document from there
http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/publish/shadow/WD-shadow-dom-20140619/.
Note that I've also changed the date to 20140619, one week later.
Thanks, I put it in place,
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Hayato Ito <[email protected]> wrote:
Thank you guys,
As Shadow DOM spec editor, I'm okay to use the wording which
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-appmanifest-20131217/ uses.
Can I assume that someone will change the wording and install the document
to TR?
I am wondering whether I have to update https://w3c.github.io/
webcomponents/publish/shadow/WD-shadow-dom-20140612/ again or not so
that someone could copy the document from there.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Jérémie Astori <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Yves,
This document will not be published tomorrow as I don't see this resolved
1 day prior to the publication.
Can you re-stage it for next week (either Tuesday or Thursday at your
convenience) once this is resolved?
Thanks,
Jérémie
On 11/06/14 09:58, Ian Jacobs wrote:
On Jun 11, 2014, at 9:53 AM, Jérémie Astori <[email protected]> wrote:
[+Ian]
Ian,
Could you give us a pointer to the decision explaining the approved
wording please?
This thread in April is an attempt to build support for updated pubrules
and best practices:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2014AprJun/0001
I have not had time to return to that thread but should have time now
that we are past the AC meeting.
Ian
Meanwhile, Art, I suggest changing the document to include the approved
wording. Doing so (and keeping the discussion open) will ensure the
document can be published tomorrow.
Regards,
Jérémie
On 10/06/14 14:14, Arthur Barstow wrote:
It seems to me the essence of the two text blocks is effectively the
same. I think it would be helpful, if, for each of the four sentences, you
identified the specific part(s) that is not acceptable (and cite the
document that shows why WebApps text is not acceptable). Would you please
do this?
-Thanks, Art
On 6/10/14 2:07 PM, Jérémie Astori wrote:
Hi Yves and Art,
This document cannot be published as is because of the bottom overlay
saying:
This Version of this Document Is Obsolete and Has Been Replaced
This version of the specification is obsolete and has been
replaced by the document at http://w3c.github.io/
webcomponents/spec/shadow/. Do
not attempt to implement this version of the specification. Do not
refer to this version except as a historical artifact.
For wording, you can use the approved text that can be found on the
appmanifest specification [1]:
THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS!
This specification is for review and not for implementation! For
the latest updates, including important bug fixes, please look at the
draft on GitHub instead.
Let me know if you have any question.
Regards,
Jérémie
[1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-appmanifest-20131217/
On 10/06/14 11:01, Yves Lafon wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Jérémie Astori wrote:
[+Yves, +Xiaoqian]
Yves or Xiaoqian,
Could you install the document in TR please?
Done,
On 10/06/14 09:35, Arthur Barstow wrote:
WebApps would like to publish a new WD of the (standalone) Shadow
DOM spec on June 12:
<https://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/publish/shadow/
WD-shadow-dom-20140612/>
OK?
-Thanks, AB
--
Ian Jacobs <[email protected]> http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260 9447
--
Hayato
--
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
~~Yves
