A user account is required in order to edit this wiki, but we've had to disable public user registrations due to spam.

To request an account, ask an autoconfirmed user on IRC (such as one of these permanent autoconfirmed members).

Difference between revisions of "Change Proposal for ISSUE-150"

From WHATWG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with '==Summary== Do not micromanage editors on editorial details. ==Rationale== Pushing for details such as how to write down Unicode character names only makes sense if all W3C s...')
 
(Rationale)
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
Pushing for details such as how to write down Unicode character names only makes sense if all W3C specifications were using the same notation. As they are not using the same notation this problem is greater than HTML5 and cannot be solved by this Working Group micromanaging its editors.
 
Pushing for details such as how to write down Unicode character names only makes sense if all W3C specifications were using the same notation. As they are not using the same notation this problem is greater than HTML5 and cannot be solved by this Working Group micromanaging its editors.
+
 
 +
With any edit of this scale, errors are made. Given the sensitive nature of the particular topic at hand, these errors could be especially bad, ranging for interoperability errors (where different browsers implement different rules because they were done before or after the edit), to validators giving bad advice (because of inconsistencies between sections giving authoring conformance criteria and sections giving implementation requirements), to introducing oddities into the platform (e.g. using an unusual character for separating a list).
 +
 
 
==Details==
 
==Details==
  

Revision as of 21:42, 6 February 2011

Summary

Do not micromanage editors on editorial details.

Rationale

Pushing for details such as how to write down Unicode character names only makes sense if all W3C specifications were using the same notation. As they are not using the same notation this problem is greater than HTML5 and cannot be solved by this Working Group micromanaging its editors.

With any edit of this scale, errors are made. Given the sensitive nature of the particular topic at hand, these errors could be especially bad, ranging for interoperability errors (where different browsers implement different rules because they were done before or after the edit), to validators giving bad advice (because of inconsistencies between sections giving authoring conformance criteria and sections giving implementation requirements), to introducing oddities into the platform (e.g. using an unusual character for separating a list).

Details

No change.

Impact

Editors will not feel micromanaged. W3C consistency can still be pursued at a higher level and applied retroactively later.