On Oct 4, 2005, at 09:32, Doug Barton wrote:
As long as we're talking about updating 203, I'd also like to take this opportunity to point out that the current discussion highlights some of the problems with documents of this type, namely that they are generally out of date within minutes of being published.
Although this is a diversion from the original discussion, I think it's a worthwhile topic for the WG to consider. Maybe the WG could put expiry dates on its documents? ie "This document dies in X years unless it is reviewed and updated if necessary." I'm sure Peter would have made a mental note that 203 would need to be revisited some time after it came out. [Which will explain why it's on the agenda for next week. :-)] Perhaps that could/should be formalised somehow so that some of the WG agenda planning can be done on a longer-term basis?