<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">For comparison, the Unicode Standard
has the model where a link generally would get you the latest
version of a document, but each document contains a header with a
link to the previous revision of the document.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">That way, if you want to point people
to the latest version of a document you can use an "evergreen"
link, but if you need to be sure that the link goes to a specific
version, there's that option as well.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/">http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/</a></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">or</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/latest">http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/latest</a></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">would get the latest version and <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/2018-05-12/">http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/2018-05-12/</a>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">would be a specific version. Each
version remaining unaltered once posted. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">A./<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/8/2019 12:54 PM, Jim DeLaHunt
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1e05ecb8-ceda-50ff-4fd3-3f9d6f6ccfe7@jdlh.com">UA
Colleagues:
<br>
<br>
I think the problem Michael points out is a real one, and worthy
of attention.
<br>
<br>
On 2019-01-08 07:03, Michael Casadevall wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">So currently, the UASG publishes various
documents such as UASG 0005 and
<br>
0007 and occasionally updates these documents to reflect best
current
<br>
practices. For example, the UA Quick Guide was on Version 9
before it
<br>
was removed for revision.
<br>
<br>
One thing I'm concerned on is that it's not clear that a
document has
<br>
been updated, nor what has changed from version to version.
Furthermore,
<br>
when dealing with old discussions, a document may have changed
from a
<br>
message or posted....
<br>
</blockquote>
Michael proposes one alternative,
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">…to change the numbering and management of
UASG documentation
<br>
to model it around the RFC/IETF where a document is static once
<br>
published (with errata linked), and is obsoleted/superseded by
future
<br>
documents.…
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Another alternative is to keep the document number unchanged, but
to have a clearly-defined revision date for each version of a
document, and to always cite a revision date along with the
document number. So, we would say "UASG012 Email Address
Internationalization (EAI): A Technical Overview (v 2018-05-12)"
instead of "UASG012" or "Email Address Internationalization (EAI):
A Technical Overview".
<br>
<br>
Whichever we do, I believe we should set editorial standards that
each document has a) document title, b) UASG number, and c)
revision date clearly on the front cover and in the file name of
each document issued. Looking through some existing documents, we
seem to be inconsistent about this. It makes documents harder to
find and harder to cite.
<br>
<br>
I believe we should also define standard, persistent URLs for each
document, something like:
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/2018-05-12/">http://uasg.tech/document/uasg012/email_address_internationalization_EAI_a_technical_overview/2018-05-12/</a>
<br>
<br>
and ensure that visiting such a URL with a web browser returns
either the document file itself, or a page describing the document
and allowing one to download it. I find it hard to put links to
UASG documents into presentations, because it's difficult to
figure out which URL to use, and how much to trust it to stay
usable over time.
<br>
<br>
Best regard,
<br>
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>