[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]


I am seriously considering adopting [1]doc-html-w3. I use many of these 
recommendation on a daily basis where I work. It would be nice to have a 
current local copy of them. However, before I decide to go any further with 
the adoption process, I want to get some feedback for an idea that I have. 

I would like to change doc-html-w3's name to one that is more descriptive of 
its current and potential contents. I think that the name of this package is 
currently too narrow; besides HTML, indicated by the name, it also contains 
CSS2, SMIL, XPATH and many other recommendations. What do you think?

Here are a couple of the names I've been kicking around:
   a) doc-w3 (most general, my favorite; perhaps even doc-w3c)
   b) doc-markup-w3 (but this name excludes style: CSS2, XSLT, etc)
   c) doc-w3c-recommend
   d) [your suggestion here]

Feel free to CC me, thanks.

Joe Schlecht

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=no\&bug=110945

Reply to: