Re: Topic/Proposal/Argument view of review comments

• Mail folder: html-archive
• Next message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Disagree: HTML 2.0 is not text/html [Re: Hot Metal and HTML ]"
• Previous message: Peter Flynn: "Re: Hot Metal and HTML"

Date: Wed, 15 Jun 94 10:54:22 EDT
Message-id: <9406151452.AA00587@ulua.hal.com>
Reply-To: html-ig@oclc.org
Originator: html-ig@oclc.org
Sender: html-ig@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@oclc.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-ig@oclc.org>
Subject: Re: Topic/Proposal/Argument view of review comments 
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Implementation Group

Terry Allen suggested that this WIT stuff might be distracting.  I can
see that.

I still prefer to get replacements or diffs from the online HTML files
(grab the tar file if you want to have a local copy), but that only
works if it's a simple case of the text of the spec being different
from the general consensus.

For topics for which there is no consensus, the
topic/proposal/argument stuff is handy, and the ReviewTopics doc is a
way of showing everybody where I think the unresolved issues are.

Dan

In message <9406142306.AA00494@ulua.hal.com>, "Daniel W. Connolly" writes:
>
>I am attempting to maintain a view of the review comments in this
>structure at:
>
>	http://www.hal.com/%7Econnolly/html-spec/notes/ReviewTopics.html
>
>I suggest that everybody take a look at it, and try to use this
>structure when making your comments -- even to the point of
>writing something like:
>
>	Topic: Level 0 Features
>	Proposal: don't allow H1 inside A
>
>or
>
>	In-Support-Of: 234234lkjerw@foo.com
>
>Please try to resist the temptation to stick 27 different topics,
>proposals, and arguments into one message.