+1, duplicating material is a recipe for disaster.
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Dec 2, 2009, at 8:22 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
On Dec 1, 2009, at 22:22 , Marcin Hanclik wrote:
Can you please update this to just be a delta?
As far as I know W3C specs, delta documents are usually errata or
WG Notes.
What we have been calling delta specification in WebApps are
specifications that add to another. For instance, WARP adds the
<access> element to P+C. It doesn't make some huge cut and paste of P
+C just because it modifies. This is as much about sane editing
practice and being able to work with a team as it is about clean
architecture and separation of concerns.
The expectation was that WARP4U would add something to WARP, perhaps
attributes, perhaps attribute values, perhaps child elements, and
certainly some processing. It's a delta spec. It's not considered to
be the next version, it's a different feature set.
Therefore I would keep the document as it is.
I then have to maintain the strongest objection possible to it being
published, even as FPWD. Such copying is inappropriate, and will
lead to no end of editorial problems. It fosters confusion and
brings no value.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
