Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> Wed, 11 August 2010 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ian@hixie.ch>
X-Original-To: link-relations@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382E73A6AEA for <link-relations@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:33:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.457
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.457 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.142, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vuFCQvfzyoyj for <link-relations@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a44.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5B83A6AE8 for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a44.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a44.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F69118064; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=hixie.ch; h=date:from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:mime-version: content-type; q=dns; s=hixie.ch; b=SNtalbyjIt4UXlFiaeK67BORNeuQa FsyQ347Q61CnLZh9b+JPD8+WrZ98bjjeO5p7sjiSyt7gi3sm3nmBPrXsrzWtHHP+ gdbO1LXc9twJJwKP68P2HgnarWNwv5RoSHlKdhs4DAFmSvrhbldOC1wsCclZGSpM 2xDuOCfHwTNL64=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=hixie.ch; h=date:from:to :cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:mime-version: content-type; s=hixie.ch; bh=9AJ65UDVB0h6fszeFQzZ2xCbyUQ=; b=HFy 3dhdHcZmkS+inNL3uPzfcufx5vApzSaVS2Msg5ZBrM5AzGZJIIay7xe54tst02kt JUIhTKpbrBexMtEzqNjwf/LudfGS1xQCL4/tiU8bmDrBiSwiCTp5clgv+PhNACaI FNcigvoA4n2uAX3Hg5WXAifX2hAEWTs6Hu3CsAyM=
Received: from ps20323.dreamhostps.com (ps20323.dreamhost.com [69.163.222.251]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: internal@index.hixie.ch) by homiemail-a44.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E7D2118060; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:34:16 +0000 (UTC)
From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4C627639.6040307@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008111730240.22155@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008100803420.22575@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4C61A497.8080106@gmx.de> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008102110230.11992@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4C6263B2.9090008@gmx.de> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008110925060.22155@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4C627639.6040307@gmx.de>
Content-Language: en-GB-hixie
Content-Style-Type: text/css
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: link-relations@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 17:33:42 -0000

On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > > 
> > > That being said, I'm fine with this registration if it actually 
> > > refers to the W3C Working Draft (that 
> > > is,<http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/>;).
> > 
> > So to be clear, you are rejecting this registration unless it 
> > references the out-of-date snapshot document on the W3C site rather 
> > than either the WHATWG document or the current W3C document? (So in 
> > particular, you are rejecting this registration at least until the 
> > next snapshot publication?) ...
> 
> I haven't rejected anything. I'm saying that the registration should 
> point to a stable document in W3C space, and I don't think the "current 
> editor's copy" qualifies as that.
> 
> What's the problem with waiting with the actual registration until the 
> new WD is out?

The TR/ page drafts are out-of-date obsolete drafts. We shouldn't be using 
them as a reference, as they are almost by definition known to be 
incorrect. (I don't believe we have ever published a TR/ draft of this 
specification that was up-to-date when it was published.) I would 
definitely not consider it acceptable to have the registration point to a 
document that is known to be wrong.

It's not clear what benefit it would bring, either. That draft is no more 
stable (it changes frequently), it's no more representative of consensus 
(we have always had more outstanding known issues when publishing than 
the contemporary editor's draft), and it is technically inferior (again, 
it has always been published with more known issues).

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'