virtio — archive

[Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:43:39PM -0500, Paul Knight wrote: > Hi Michael and all, > Please see below.. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > Some questions: > > I think we prefer the PDF version of the spec to > be authoritative one and not the HTML one. > Can we change the citation link to point to that? > > No, please don't... although the HTML may not be authoritative, we want the > citation link to point to HTML for easiest retrieval. Okay. BTW in what way do we supply the files? Can chair just upload them? >  Please look at the > "front pages" which I provided in the ZIP file, and you'll see that the PDF > format is already listed at the top under the "Specification URIs" as " > (Authoritative)".  As soon as someone retrieves the HTML, they will see this, > so they can get the PDF if desired.  However, our approach is to consider that > many busy people just want to glance at the specification, and might be > deterred by having to retrieve a PDF of unknown length. > > The "citation format" is intended to be included as a reference in some other > document, so we'd like people to be inclined to look at the OASIS docs...  Of > course, if you are sending links to people, please feel free to send the PDF > link... > > > I think we want to also mention the virtio-comment mailing > list and not just the web form as a way to submit comments. > Is that OK? > > I believe the link goes to the page > ( http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=virtio ) > where they can first subscribe, then they can go to the comment page.  People > can't comment until they subscribe.  OASIS IPR rules require this...  (imagine > a "patent troll" submits their patented idea as a nice addition to the spec, > then claims all kinds of damages, etc...  the subscription process helps > prevent this...) (very loooong story...) > This is boilerplate info which we want to keep standard... > > > Do we need to leave stubs for things we don't have? > E.g. > This specification is related to: >     Related speifications (list) > > can we just remove this until we have some related specifications? > > Yes, please remove any unwanted/unused sections completely (other than the > "Previous version").  > > Hope that all makes sense...   > > Best regards, > Paul > -- > Paul Knight  - Tel: +1 781-861-1013 > OASIS - Advancing open standards for the information society > Document Process Analyst >