search

w3c / epub-specs

Shared workspace for EPUB 3 specifications.
Other
304 stars 60 forks source link

EPUB policy to update references to external specifications, or not to #358

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
To make sure the discussion would not be lost:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/epub-working-group/Vo2RvwnYb
As

Original issue reported on code.google.com by kojii...@gmail.com on 3 May 2013 at 2:38

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by kojii...@gmail.com on 3 May 2013 at 2:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Proposal is here:
1.  Since it looks to me that what you care most is the property name, define 
–epub- prefix property as they were in EPUB 3.0.
2.  What I care most is referencing the most up-to-date spec, and value syntax. 
I guess you’re happy to update references as long as #1 above is done, am I 
correct?
3.  Value syntax is a bit more complex. Having a prose about backward 
compatibility is likely to lead un-interoperable implementations I believe. 
Rather, I propose to define a value syntax in EPUB 3.0.1 spec that supports 
both the current and old value syntax, possibly including value syntaxes that 
were not in the spec but is used widely in the world. I think this was the 
original proposal from fantasai and me at SF writing party, at that point, 
either way makes no differences so we just went to dated reference. Now that 
backward compatibility for value syntax is a bit more complex than thought, I 
would like EPUB 3.0.1 spec includes recommended value syntax.
4.  We keep updating dated references until we reach to PR, or the referencing 
spec reaches to REC.

Original comment by kojii...@gmail.com on 3 May 2013 at 2:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Re: 2.  What I care most is referencing the most up-to-date spec, and value 
syntax. I guess you’re happy to update references as long as #1 above is 
done, am I correct?

I still see no reasons to update dated references.

Re: 4.  We keep updating dated references until we reach to PR, or the 
referencing spec reaches to REC.

I disagree.

I oppose to changes to dated references unless reality 
is very different from what EPUB3 says.

Original comment by eb2m...@gmail.com on 16 Aug 2013 at 9:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
As resolved on the WG 20130822 call [1], the policy remains unchanged. 
Separately, the WG will produce an informative document that aggregates 
information about all properties of the CSS Profile.

[1] 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19hgdsyWiGXKc-CUZlOA3PeaVdvR88DEkcIjsCpdXZAE/
edit

Original comment by markus.g...@gmail.com on 28 Aug 2013 at 8:49