- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it.
- Most likely, new comments will not be taken into account by the new three Working Group members in their work of developing the final Recommendations. You are free however to continue discussing in the spirit of "discussing about Wikipedia is a work in progress". :)
Changes since first iterationEdit
Diff between first iteration draft and current one. --MarioGom (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
I object to the word "living". A document is not a biological organism. If you mean "changeable/adaptable to input", then why not use the word "dynamic", which means these things with a nice positive connotation? Casliber (talk) 13:50, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Casliber for your opinion ... the use of 'living' in this context is as in ... to remain alive, relevant, and up-to-the-moment. The word 'dynamic' is a great one, that denotes change, but not necessarily updated relevancy. Islahaddow (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- Ummm, definitions on google of 'dynamic' include "(of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress" and "(of a person) positive in attitude and full of energy and new ideas.", so I (and the dictionary) would disagree with that interpretation of updated relevancy. Ultimately is trifling - it bothers me as I think the current adjective is misapplied but probably won't bother anyone else. Casliber (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)