Re: PSA: Publishing working draft of URL spec
On 12/02/2014 06:54 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: If the document doesn't meet pubrules, that will cause a delay as Sam and I deal with it. I'm new to being a W3C Editor, but I did manage to find: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules I made a number of fixes: https://github.com/whatwg/url/commit/0b3840580f92a7d15a76235d8ee67254ca0824da https://github.com/w3ctag/url/commit/1ea9cc3ac4594daa670864d1568832251199dfa7 Updated draft: https://rawgit.com/w3ctag/url/develop/url.html Pubrules results: http://tinyurl.com/lphqp9b --- Open issues: 1) The title page date and the date at the end of the This Version URI MUST match. Issue: Bikeshed adds a level identifier to the URI[sic]. Options: request a variance; patch bikeshed; have the webmaster fix this downstream. 2) The editors'/authors' names MUST be listed. Issue: one of the editors is not a WG member, both editors prefer editors NOT be listed. This is not unique: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Sep/0105.html Recommendation: request a variance. 3) The copyright MUST use the following markup Issue: the pubrules mandated markup doesn't match the charter specified license for this specification. Recommendation: request a variance. 4) All proposed XML namespaces created by the publication of the document MUST follow URIs for W3C Namespaces. Issue: the pubrules checker seems to have found an XML namespace where none is present nor intended. Recommendation: request a variance. There is an open CfC to move the document to the 2014 Process, but it doesn't really matter whether this or the next Public Working Draft is published under that process so it won't hold up a Public Working Draft if we can get the pubrules etc sorted in time. I've left the 2005 process link for now; will update once the CfC completes. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex cha...@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com - Sam Ruby
Re: PSA: Publishing working draft of URL spec
On 12/3/14 10:42 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: On 12/02/2014 06:54 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: I'm new to being a W3C Editor, but I did manage to find: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules Besides the above, the following which includes links to the various validators: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/SpecEditing#TR_Publication_Process_and_WebApps. Updated draft: https://rawgit.com/w3ctag/url/develop/url.html Please run validator.w3.org/checklink and it appears you want to delete the ...-1-... in the This version link. -Thanks, AB
Re: PSA: Publishing working draft of URL spec
On 12/03/2014 10:57 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 12/3/14 10:42 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: On 12/02/2014 06:54 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: I'm new to being a W3C Editor, but I did manage to find: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules Besides the above, the following which includes links to the various validators: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/SpecEditing#TR_Publication_Process_and_WebApps. Thanks! Updated draft: https://rawgit.com/w3ctag/url/develop/url.html Please run validator.w3.org/checklink and it appears you want to delete the ...-1-... in the This version link. This is a consequence of the first issue I mentioned, namely that Bikeshed adds a level identifier to the URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014OctDec/0547.html --- Running the WebIDL checker results in three errors being reported. http://tinyurl.com/kcwx2hj Can somebody confirm that these are real errors? -Thanks, AB - Sam Ruby
PSA: Publishing working draft of URL spec
Hi, (chair hat on) this is an answer to the request in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014OctDec/0315.html to publish a new Working Draft of the URL spec. There is no need for a CfC, per our Working Mode documents, so this is announcement that we intend to publish a new Public Working Draft of the URL spec, whose technical content will be based on what is found at https://specs.webplatform.org/url/webspecs/develop/ and https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ If the document doesn't meet pubrules, that will cause a delay as Sam and I deal with it. There is an open CfC to move the document to the 2014 Process, but it doesn't really matter whether this or the next Public Working Draft is published under that process so it won't hold up a Public Working Draft if we can get the pubrules etc sorted in time. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex cha...@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
RE: Publishing working draft of URL spec
From: cha...@yandex-team.ru [mailto:cha...@yandex-team.ru] There is no need for a CfC, per our Working Mode documents, so this is announcement that we intend to publish a new Public Working Draft of the URL spec, whose technical content will be based on what is found at https://specs.webplatform.org/url/webspecs/develop/ and https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ Which of these two? They are quite different.
Re: Publishing working draft of URL spec
On 12/2/14 7:01 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: From: cha...@yandex-team.ru [mailto:cha...@yandex-team.ru] There is no need for a CfC, per our Working Mode documents, so this is announcement that we intend to publish a new Public Working Draft of the URL spec, whose technical content will be based on what is found at https://specs.webplatform.org/url/webspecs/develop/ and https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ Which of these two? They are quite different. https://url.spec.whatwg.org/ The only content differences are a matter of propagation delay. The content at https://specs.webplatform.org/url/webspecs/develop/ isn't ready yet. Once it is ready, I plan to sync all documents. - Sam Ruby
