Check references category and stability #295
Comments
…Level The <dfn> tags were incorrectly surrounding "term" instead of "throw". Also, as alluded to in w3c#295, "NotAllowedError" is only defined in "WebIDL (Second Level)", and the spec referenced "WebIDL Level 1". I'm not clear at this stage whether "NotAllowedError" will make it to Level 1, but it seems better to reference Level 2 in the meantime.
…Level The <dfn> tags were incorrectly surrounding "term" instead of "throw". Also, as alluded to in #295, "NotAllowedError" is only defined in "WebIDL (Second Level)", and the spec referenced "WebIDL Level 1". I'm not clear at this stage whether "NotAllowedError" will make it to Level 1, but it seems better to reference Level 2 in the meantime.
This commit updates all HTML 5.0 references to HTML 5.1. To help assess references stability (issue w3c#295), the spec now also directly references the WebIDL Level 1 Recommendation, pointing out that NotAllowedError is defined in WebIDL Level 2. References to the WHATWG version of HTML for "current settings object" and "relevant settings object" now target HMTL 5.1 as well. Other changes introduced in this commit: - Correct nesting of <a>, <code>, <dfn> to make sure code definitions get styled in red as expected - ReSpec now automatically supports aliases such as "start()" for method, so dropped the now redundant alias definitions. - Turned references incorrectly marked as informative into normative references (UUID, cookies, RFCs).
* Issue #396: Migrate HTML 5.0 references to HTML 5.1 This commit updates all HTML 5.0 references to HTML 5.1. To help assess references stability (issue #295), the spec now also directly references the WebIDL Level 1 Recommendation, pointing out that NotAllowedError is defined in WebIDL Level 2. References to the WHATWG version of HTML for "current settings object" and "relevant settings object" now target HMTL 5.1 as well. Other changes introduced in this commit: - Correct nesting of <a>, <code>, <dfn> to make sure code definitions get styled in red as expected - ReSpec now automatically supports aliases such as "start()" for method, so dropped the now redundant alias definitions. - Turned references incorrectly marked as informative into normative references (UUID, cookies, RFCs). * HTML 5.1 terms moved to a list, () dropped from method references Addressing @mfoltzgoogle comments on previous commit, the list of HTML 5.1 terms are now defined in a list, sorted by alphabetic order. Parentheses next to method names now dropped throughout the specification.
|
I believe the Presentation API now references stable published specifications whenever possible. One remaining open question: can the Presentation API simply reference the latest version of WebIDL, even though it is not in a stable state, or should the Presentation API spec continue to reference both WebIDL Level 1 and WebIDL Level 2 to point out all WebIDL terms used in the spec are defined in Level 1 except I'll try to come up with an answer (needed before requesting transition to Proposed Recommendation, not needed for publication as Candidate Recommendation). |
|
Can this be closed now @tidoust? All of the sub-tasks have been addressed. |
|
Closing this issue since all updates were made to the spec, see follow-up issue #408 on reference to WebIDL. |
I'm creating this issue to track down references. It does not need to be addressed before publication as a Candidate Recommendation.
For the Presentation API to be published as a final W3C Recommendation, normative references will need to reference stable specs, the rule of thumb being that a Recommendation should normatively link to other Recommendations (or similar documents published by other organizations) and not to working drafts.
There may be exceptions to the rule, which should be documented in the Status of This Document section. For instance, since WebIDL is not yet a Recommendation, recently published specs have sentences such as "By publishing this Recommendation, W3C expects the functionality specified in this Recommendation will not be affected by changes to Web IDL as the WebIDL specification proceeds to Recommendation." as in the Web Storage spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2016/REC-webstorage-20160419/#status-of-this-document
Also, we need to ensure that references are correctly flagged as normative or informative, depending on how they get used in the spec.
Making a quick pass through the spec:
NotAllowedError, defined in WebIDL (Second Level) but not in WebIDL Level 1Blob, defined in the File API specThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: