ISSUE-64: Proposed Changes to
Proposed Changes to
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Best Practices Document
- Raised by:
- Daniel Appelquist
- Opened on:
- 2005-11-21
- Description:
- Sources section doesn\'t list reference for Little Spring Design. Sprint
guidelines also missing.
Sources section also doesn\'t make clear the reliance on research performed by
group members which may be based on research that their companies have carried
out and how this research impacts the best practices. (reference: public
feedback from Tony Cawood)
Proposed changes:
Add link to Little Spring Design.
Add Sprint guidelines to list.
Add text: [add paragraph under current bulleted list] While the best practice
statements have primarily been assembled by secondary research, the sources for
that research have in many cases been assembled from primary research. In
addition, group members contributions are to some extent informed by primary
research carried out by their company. - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: ISSUE-64: Proposed Changes to \\\'Sources\\\' Section (5.1.1) (from andrea@trasatti.it on 2005-11-27)
- [minutes] Thu Nov 24 teleconference (from dom@w3.org on 2005-11-24)
- ISSUE-64: Proposed Changes to \\\'Sources\\\' Section (5.1.1) (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2005-11-21)
- RE: ISSUE-64: Proposed Changes to \\\'Sources\\\' Section (5.1.1) (from paul.walsh@segalamtest.com on 2005-11-21)
Related notes:
No additional notes.
Display change log
