2012/1/24 Glenn Adams <[email protected]> > The problem is that the proposal (as I understand it) is to insert > something like: > > "DOM2 (a REC) is obsolete. Use DOM4 (a work in progress)." > > This addition is tantamount (by the reading of some) to demoting the > status of DOM2 to "a work in progress". >
Clearly we need to be careful with our choice of words, though in this case I wouldn't go as far as saying a stale document becomes a work in progress when clearly the work in progress is a step forward and the state document is the one no longer progressing. But let's not perpetuate this back-and-forth. How about we get some proposed verbiage for individual specs and discuss further at that point. I think we all agree that a notice in some form would be beneficial as long as its intent is clear. > > > 2012/1/24 Bronislav Klučka <[email protected]> > >> Hello, >> I do understand the objection, but how relevant should it be here? If >> some regulation/law dictates that work must follow e.g. DOM 2, than it does >> not matter that it's obsolete... The law takes precedence here regardless >> of status of the document. Technically in such case one don't need to worry >> himself about any progress or status of such document or specification. >> >> >> On 23.1.2012 19:06, Glenn Adams wrote: >> >>> I object to adding such notice until all of the proposed replacement >>> specs reach REC status. >>> >>> G. >>> >>> Brona >> >>
