9057 2010-02-17 21:59:52 +0000 status section, ref to "HTML specifications" 2010-10-04 14:29:53 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED FIXED P3 normal --- 1 julian.reschke ian ian mike mjs public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 32292 0 julian.reschke 2010-02-17 21:59:52 +0000 "These bugs, issues, and e-mails apply to all HTML specifications, not just this one." This is misleading; not every spec that the HTML WG currently works on is a "HTML specification" See also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0453.html: "...So I agree the term is not enlightening. Probably the least ambiguous thing to do is either list the three specs covered, or split the bug lists somehow." 32422 1 ian 2010-02-18 22:52:53 +0000 Would s/all HTML specifications/multiple HTML-related specifications/ work? 32440 2 julian.reschke 2010-02-19 09:24:47 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > Would s/all HTML specifications/multiple HTML-related specifications/ work? That's better. My preference though is to fix the underlying issue (so that every document gets it's own bugzilla product) 32600 3 mjs 2010-02-23 21:51:20 +0000 (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Would s/all HTML specifications/multiple HTML-related specifications/ work? > > That's better. My preference though is to fix the underlying issue (so that > every document gets it's own bugzilla product) > My suggestion: let's go with "multiple HTML-related specifications" for now to unblock publication, and in the meantime figure out how we want to handle bug-tracking for the separate documents. 32601 4 ian 2010-02-23 22:25:57 +0000 Done. 34277 5 ian 2010-03-31 21:30:19 +0000 marking fixed since apparently i forgot to do so when marking this "done".