On 12/6/13 2:04 PM, ext James Robinson wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Arthur Barstow <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Both Travis and I supported keeping that information in the
boilerplate. The W3C Staff told us it must be removed before the
LC could be published as at TR. (FYI, I filed a related Issue
against the TR publication rules
<https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/71>. I think
the public-w3process list is an appropriate place to discuss the
Consortium's publication rules.)
If that's the requirement from the Team to publish as TR, then I
object to publishing as a TR until the requirements are fixed. If and
when the publishing rules are fixed then we can consider proceeding again.
(I asked for an explanation on the publication requirements.)
The spec text as currently exists is actively harmful since it forks
the living standard without even having a reference to it.
In case you missed it, the draft LCWD does include a reference to the
WHATWG spec:
[[
<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/innerhtml/raw-file/tip/LCWD-DOM-Parsing-20131205.html#sotd>
This specification is based on the original work of the DOM Parsing and
Serialization Living Specification <http://domparsing.spec.whatwg.org/>,
though it has diverged in terms of supported features, normative
requirements, and algorithm specificity. As appropriate, relevant fixes
from the living standard are incorporated into this document.
]]
-AB
