| CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 10:00:58 GMT
content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8
content-encoding: gzip
content-location: b29f6b51a034.html
vary: negotiate,Accept-Encoding
tcn: choice
strict-transport-security: max-age=63072000
content-security-policy: upgrade-insecure-requests;
last-modified: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 09:34:17 GMT
cache-control: public, max-age=2592000, s-maxage=2592000
cf-cache-status: HIT
set-cookie: __cf_bm=qZEN4OysYL77Zo4gwdXTYaPW6WKuQf4MXX4A3ovkCqk-1760090458-1.0.1.1-xx90T81oIXNWWgtqD2CbORPP_7JgvR9IRH09_t5D6DpGcx2tpB0cp_fXGUg1mDJFen4YYFCvy9kfUi2h1uGBTTpEjDDNPuqIAW98S.x.8Cc; path=/; expires=Fri, 10-Oct-25 10:30:58 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
cf-ray: 98c5460fb99ac177-BLR
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
AB: changeset 47:b29f6b51a034
| author | charles |
| Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:01:28 +0100 | |
| changeset 47 | b29f6b51a034 |
| parent 46 | ea903587f98e |
| child 48 | 2097fedfe542 |
Cleaning up markup, links… ISSUE-49 (Removed change markers - check changelog)
| tr.html |
--- a/tr.html Mon Oct 21 22:45:14 2013 +0100 +++ b/tr.html Tue Oct 22 03:01:28 2013 +0100 @@ -23,12 +23,13 @@ <div class="head"> <p> <a href="https://www.w3.org/"><img alt="W3C" src="https://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" height="48" width="72"></a> </p> - <h1 class="title" id="title">Recommendation Track Process, draft proposal</h1> + <h1 class="title" id="title">Recommendation Track Process, "Last Call" + draft proposal</h1> <h2 id="w3c-working-draft-20-september-2012"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium"></abbr>Editors' - Draft 18 October 2013</h2> + Draft 21 October 2013</h2> <dl> - <!--dt>Latest published version:</dt> - <dd><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/HTML-longdesc">https://www.w3.org/TR/HTML-longdesc</a></dd--> + <dt>Current active version:</dt> + <dd><a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html</a></dd> <dt>Latest editor's draft:</dt> <dd> <a href="https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html">https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html</a></dd> <dt>Editor:</dt> @@ -52,15 +53,14 @@ <p>This is a revised draft proposal to replace the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">current chapter 7 of the W3C process document</a> with a more effective W3C Specification life cycle following the meeting of the W3C Advisory - Board 14 October 2013. This document is an editor's draft for the - Advisory Board but does not yet fully reflect consensus. The Advisory - Board proposed, at its 14 October meeting, recommending the content of - this draft (although the last version they saw was the 9 October - draft) as a "Last Call" draft proposed for adoption by the Advisory - Committee as a replacement for the existing Chapter 7. Review will - take place over several weeks, including the week of W3C's TPAC - meeting (10-15 November), before a formal decision on adoption is - made.</p> + Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 21 October 2013. This document is an + editor's draft of a "Last Call" version. The Task Force resolved at + its 21 October meeting to recommend the agreed draft (although the + last version they saw was the 9 October draft) as a "Last Call" draft + proposed for adoption by the Advisory Committee as a replacement for + the existing Chapter 7. Review will take place over several weeks, + including the week of W3C's TPAC meeting (10-15 November), before a + formal decision on adoption is made.</p> <p>An initial version was first proposed to the W3C Advisory Board on 13 May 2013 as a possible replacement for the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">current chapter 7 of the W3C process document</a>, and a <a href="https://yadi.sk/d/Zikwkr385JG8f">subsequent @@ -72,15 +72,15 @@ Board retains formal responsibility for decisions on what it proposes to the Advisory Committee, and the adoption of any change to the process will follow the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/processdoc.html#GAProcess">existing - process for such changes</a> subject to the resolution of <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/39">ISSUE-39</a>.</p> + process for such changes</a>, subject to the resolution of <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/39">ISSUE-39</a>.</p> <p>I am grateful to the W3C Advisory Board, the W3C Process Community Group, Art Barstow, Robin Berjon, Wayne Carr, Marcos Cáceres, Ivan - Herman, Ian Hickson, Ian Jacobs, Chris Lilley, Ralph Swick, Anne van - Kesteren, Steve Zilles, and many people I have forgotten to - acknowledge for suggestions, comments and discussions that helped me - sort out my thinking, and to Ora Lassila for the original version of - the image that illustrates the normal process of a W3C - Recommendation-track document. </p> + Herman, Ian Hickson, Ian Jacobs, Jeff Jaffe, Chris Lilley, Ralph + Swick, Anne van Kesteren, Steve Zilles, and many people I have + forgotten to acknowledge for suggestions, comments and discussions + that helped me sort out my thinking, and to Ora Lassila for the + original version of the image that illustrates the normal process of a + W3C Recommendation-track document. </p> <p>Please send comments on this document to, or participate in, the <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/">W3C Process Community Group</a>. Issues related to this proposal are recorded in that @@ -177,57 +177,56 @@ <polygon points="324.306,-21.5001 334.306,-18 324.306,-14.5001 324.306,-21.5001" stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </g> </g> </svg> </p> <h3>Table of Contents</h3> - <ul id="mozToc"> + <ul id="Toc"> <!--mozToc h3 1 h4 2 h5 3 h6 4--> - <li><a href="#mozTocId663575">Table of Contents</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId640923">General requirements for Technical Reports</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId773099">7.1 Maturity Levels</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId48944">7.2 General Requirements for Advancement on + <li><a href="#general-requirements">General requirements for Technical + Reports</a></li> + <li><a href="#maturity-levels">7.1 Maturity Levels</a></li> + <li><a href="#transition-reqs">7.2 General Requirements for Advancement on the Recommendation Track</a> <ul> - <li><a href="#mozTocId61574">7.2.1 Substantive Change</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId776695">7.2.2 Wide Review</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId111988">7.2.3 Implementation Experience</a></li> + <li><a href="#substantive-change">7.2.1 Substantive Change</a></li> + <li><a href="#wide-review">7.2.2 Wide Review</a></li> + <li><a href="#implementation-experience">7.2.3 Implementation + Experience</a></li> </ul> </li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId838441">7.3 Reviews and Review Responsibilities</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId983157">7.4 Advancing a Technical Report to + <li><a href="#doc-reviews">7.3 Reviews and Review Responsibilities</a></li> + <li><a href="#rec-advance">7.4 Advancing a Technical Report to Recommendation</a> <ul> - <li><a href="#mozTocId647636">7.4.1 Working Draft</a> + <li><a href="#wd">7.4.1 Working Draft</a> <ul> - <li><a href="#mozTocId165613">7.4.1.a First Public Working Draft</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId671592">7.4.1.b Revised Public Working - Drafts</a></li> + <li><a href="#first-wd">7.4.1.a First Public Working Draft</a></li> + <li><a href="#revised-wd">7.4.1.b Revised Public Working Drafts</a></li> </ul> </li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId275563">7.4.2 Last Call Candidate Recommendation</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId809317">7.4.3 Publication of a W3C + <li><a href="#last-call">7.4.2 Last Call Candidate Recommendation</a></li> + <li><a href="#rec-publication">7.4.3 Publication of a W3C Recommendation</a> <ul> - <li><a href="#mozTocId629587">Publishing a Last Call Candidate - Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId40322">Publishing an Edited Recommendation - (See also Modifying a Recommendation below)</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId681338">For all W3C Recommendations, in - addition to meeting the general requirements for advancement,</a></li> + <li><a href="#lcrec-publication">7.4.3.a Publishing a Last Call + Candidate Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation</a></li> + <li><a href="#rec-edited">7.4.3.b Publishing an Edited + Recommendation</a></li> + <li><a href="#for-all-recs">7.4.3.c For all W3C Recommendations</a></li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId360048">7.5 Publishing a Working Group or Interest - Group Note</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId38383">7.6 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</a> + <li><a href="#tr-end">7.5 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group + Note</a></li> + <li><a href="#rec-modify">7.6 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</a> <ul> - <li><a href="#mozTocId72619">7.6.1 Errata Management</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId171734">7.6.2 Classes of Changes to a + <li><a href="#errata">7.6.1 Errata Management</a></li> + <li><a href="#correction-classes">7.6.2 Classes of Changes to a Recommendation</a></li> </ul> </li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId737554">7.7 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</a></li> - <li><a href="#mozTocId185651">Good practices</a></li> + <li><a href="#rec-rescind">7.7 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</a></li> + <li><a href="#good-practice">Good practices</a></li> </ul> - <h3>General requirements for Technical Reports</h3> + <h3 id="general-requirements">General requirements for Technical Reports</h3> <p>Every document published as part of the technical report development process <em class="rfc2119 old">must</em> be a public document. The <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">index of W3C technical reports</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-doc-list">PUB11</a>] @@ -237,47 +236,41 @@ <p>Every document published as part of the technical report development process <em class="rfc2119 old">must</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.8)</span> clearly indicate its <a href="#maturity-levels">maturity - level</a>, and <em id="DocumentStatus" class="rfc2119">must</em> <span - class="from">(was in 7.8.1)</span> include a section about the status of - the document. The status section</p> + level</a>, and <em id="DocumentStatus" class="rfc2119">must</em> + include a section about the status of the document. The status section</p> <ul> - <li><em class="rfc2119 changed">must</em> be unique each time a - specification is published<br> - <em class="rfc2119 changed"></em></li> - <li><em class="rfc2119 changed">must</em> <span class="from">(was should - in 7.8.1)</span> state who developed the specification, </li> - <li><em class="rfc2119 changed">must</em> <span class="from">(was should - in 7.8.1)</span> state how to send comments or file bugs, and where - these are recorded, </li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> be unique each time a specification is + published,<br> + <em class="rfc2119"></em></li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> state who developed the specification, </li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> state how to send comments or file bugs, + and where these are recorded, </li> <li> <em class="rfc2119">should</em> explain how the technology relates to existing international standards and related work inside or outside W3C,</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.8.1)</span> - include expectations about next steps, and</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.8.1)</span> - explain or link to an explanation of significant changes from the - previous version.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> include expectations about next steps, + and</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> explain or link to an explanation of + significant changes from the previous version.</li> </ul> - <p>Every technical report published as part of the technical report + <p>Every Technical Report published as part of the Technical Report development process is edited by one or more editors appointed by a Group Chair. It is the responsibility of these editors to ensure that the - decisions of the group are correctly reflected in subsequent drafts of the - technical report. An editor <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <span class="from">(was - in 7.8)</span> be a participant, as a Member representative, Team - representative, or Invited Expert in the group responsible for the - document(s) they are editing. </p> - <p>The Team is <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> <span class="from">(was - in 7.8)</span> to publish a technical report that does not conform to - the Team's <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules">Publication Rules</a> - (e.g., for <a name="DocumentName" id="DocumentName">naming</a>, style, - and <a name="document-copyright" id="document-copyright">copyright + decisions of the Group are correctly reflected in subsequent drafts of the + technical report. An editor <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be a + participant, as a Member representative, Team representative, or Invited + Expert in the Group responsible for the document(s) they are editing. </p> + <p>The Team is <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> to publish a Technical + Report that does not conform to the Team's <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules">Publication + Rules</a> (e.g., for <a name="DocumentName" id="DocumentName">naming</a>, + style, and <a name="document-copyright" id="document-copyright">copyright requirements</a>). These rules are subject to change by the Team from time to time. The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform group Chairs - and the Advisory Board of any changes.</p> - <p>The primary language for W3C technical reports is English. W3C encourages - the translation of its technical reports. <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/">Information + and the Advisory Board of any changes to these rules.</p> + <p>The primary language for W3C Technical Reports is English. W3C encourages + the translation of its Technical Reports. <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/">Information about translations of W3C technical reports</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-translations">PUB18</a>] - is available at the W3C Web site.<span class="from">(was in 7.8)</span></p> + is available at the W3C Web site.</p> <h3>7.1 <a name="maturity-levels" id="maturity-levels">Maturity Levels</a></h3> <dl> <dt><a name="RecsWD" id="RecsWD">Working Draft (WD)</a></dt> @@ -287,11 +280,10 @@ Recommendation; see the <a href="#DocumentStatus">document status section</a> of a Working Draft for the group's expectations. Any Working Draft not, or no longer, intended to advance to Recommendation <em - class="rfc2119">should</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.5)</span> be - published as a Working Group Note. Working Drafts do not necessarily - represent a consensus of the Working Group, and do not imply any - endorsement by W3C or its members beyond agreement to work on a general - area of technology.</dd> + class="rfc2119">should</em> be published as a Working Group Note. + Working Drafts do not necessarily represent a consensus of the Working + Group, and do not imply any endorsement by W3C or its members beyond + agreement to work on a general area of technology.</dd> <dt><a name="RecsCR" id="RecsCR">Last Call Candidate Recommendation (LC/CR)</a></dt> <dd class="changed">A Last Call Candidate Recommendation is a document @@ -304,18 +296,17 @@ experience</a></li> <li>begin formal review by the Advisory Committee, who <em class="rfc2119">may</em> recommend that the document be published as a W3C Recommendation, - returned to the Working Group for further work, or abandoned. <span - class="from">(was two steps)</span> </li> + returned to the Working Group for further work, or abandoned. </li> </ul> </dd> <dd class="new"><strong>Note:</strong> Last Call Candidate Recommendation is the state referred to in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>] as "Last Call Working Draft"</dd> - <dd class="new"><strong>Note:</strong> Last Call Candidate Recommendations - will normally be accepted as Recommendations. Announcement of a - different next step <em class="rfc2119">should</em> include the reasons - why the change in expectations comes at so late a stage.</dd> + <dd><strong>Note:</strong> Last Call Candidate Recommendations will + normally be accepted as Recommendations. Announcement of a different + next step <em class="rfc2119">should</em> include the reasons why the + change in expectations comes at so late a stage.</dd> <dt><a name="RecsW3C" id="RecsW3C">W3C Recommendation (REC)</a></dt> <dd>A W3C Recommendation is a specification or set of normative guidelines that, after extensive consensus-building, has received the endorsement @@ -324,17 +315,16 @@ <dt><a name="WGNote" id="WGNote">Working Group Note, Interest Group Note (NOTE) </a></dt> <dd>A Working Group Note or Interest Group Note is published by a - chartered Working Group or Interest Group to <span class="new">provide - a stable reference for some document that is not intended to be a - normative specification, but is nevertheless useful. For example, - supporting documents such as Use case and Requirements documents, or - Design Principles, that explain what the Working Group was trying to - achieve with a specification, or non-normative 'Good Practices" - documents.</span> A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also - publish a specification as a Note if they stop work without producing a - Recommendation. <span class="changed">A Working Group or Interest Group</span> - <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <span class="from">(was "W3C" in 7.1.4)</span> - publish a Note with or without its prior publication as a Working Draft.</dd> + chartered Working Group or Interest Group to >provide a stable + reference for some document that is not intended to be a normative + specification, but is nevertheless useful. For example, supporting + documents such as Use case and Requirements documents, or Design + Principles, that explain what the Working Group was trying to achieve + with a specification, or non-normative 'Good Practices" documents. A + Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also publish a specification + as a Note if they stop work without producing a Recommendation. A + Working Group or Interest Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish a + Note with or without its prior publication as a Working Draft.</dd> <dt><a name="RescindedRec" id="RescindedRec">Rescinded Recommendation</a></dt> <dd>A Rescinded Recommendation is an entire Recommendation that W3C no longer endorses. See also clause 10 of the licensing requirements for @@ -342,39 +332,36 @@ 5</a> of the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</dd> </dl> - <p class="new">Working Groups and Interest Groups <em class="rfc2119">may</em> - publish "Editor's drafts". Editor's drafts have no official standing - whatsoever, and do not imply consensus of a Working Group or Interest - Group, nor are their contents endorsed in any way by W3C or its members, - except to the extent that such contents happen to be consistent with some - other document which carries a higher level of endorsement.</p> + <p>Working Groups and Interest Groups <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish + "Editor's drafts". Editor's drafts have no official standing whatsoever, + and do not imply consensus of a Working Group or Interest Group, nor are + their contents endorsed in any way by W3C or its members, except to the + extent that such contents happen to be consistent with some other document + which carries a higher level of endorsement.</p> <h3>7.2 <a name="transition-reqs" id="transition-reqs">General Requirements for Advancement on the Recommendation Track</a></h3> <p>For <em>all</em> requests to advance a specification to a new maturity level other than Note the Working Group:</p> <ul> - <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.2)</span> - record the group's decision to request advancement.</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em><span class="from">(was repeated in - maturity levels)</span> obtain Director approval.</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119 ">must</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.2)</span> - provide public documentation of all <a href="#substantive-change">substantive - changes</a> to the technical report since the previous publication. - The community also appreciates public documentation of minor changes.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> record the group's decision to request + advancement.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em> obtain Director approval.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119 ">must</em> provide public documentation of all <a + href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> to the technical + report since the previous publication. The community also appreciates + public documentation of minor changes.</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally - address</a> <span class="from">(was in 7.2)</span> all issues raised - about the document since the previous maturity level.</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> <span class="from">(was in 7.2)</span> - provide <span class="new">public</span> documentation of any <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#FormalObjection">Formal + address</a> all issues raised about the document since the previous + maturity level.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide public documentation of any <a + href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#FormalObjection">Formal Objections</a>.</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119 changed">should</em> <span class="from">(was must - for CR+ in 7.2)</span> report which, if any, of the Working Group's - requirements for this document have changed since the previous step.</li> - <li><em class="rfc2119 changed">should</em> <span class="from">(was must - for CR+ in 7.2)</span> report any changes in dependencies with other - groups.</li> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">should</em> document known - implementation.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> report which, if any, of the Working + Group's requirements for this document have changed since the previous + step.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> report any changes in dependencies + with other groups.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> document known implementation.</li> </ul> <p>Because the requirements for First Public Working Drafts are fairly mechanical approval is normally fairly automatic, whereas for later stages @@ -389,16 +376,16 @@ experience. Other changes (e.g., clarifications, bug fixes, editorial repairs, and minor error corrections) are minor changes.</p> <h4>7.2.2 <a id="wide-review">Wide Review</a></h4> - <p>The requirements for wide review are not precisely defined by the - process. The objective is to ensure that the entire set of stakeholders of - the Web community, including the general public, have had adequate notice - of the progress of the Working Group and thereby an opportunity to comment - on the specification. Before approving transitions, the Director will - consider who has actually reviewed the document and provided comments, the - record of requests to and responses from reviewers, especially groups - identified as dependencies in the charter, and seek evidence of clear - communication to the general public about appropriate times and which - content to review. </p> + <p>The requirements for <dfn>wide review</dfn> are not precisely defined by + the process. The objective is to ensure that the entire set of + stakeholders of the Web community, including the general public, have had + adequate notice of the progress of the Working Group and thereby an + opportunity to comment on the specification. Before approving transitions, + the Director will consider who has actually reviewed the document and + provided comments, the record of requests to and responses from reviewers, + especially groups identified as dependencies in the charter, and seek + evidence of clear communication to the general public about appropriate + times and which content to review. </p> <p>For example, inviting review of new or significantly revised sections published in Working Drafts, and tracking those comments and the Working Group's responses, is generally a good practice which would often be @@ -419,8 +406,9 @@ sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to market needs that independent interoperable implementations of each feature of the specification will be realized. While no exhaustive list of requirements - is provided here, when assessing that there is adequate implementation - experience the Director will consider (though not be limited to):</p> + is provided here, when assessing that there is <dfn>adequate + implementation experience</dfn> the Director will consider (though not + be limited to):</p> <ul> <li>is each feature implemented, and how is this demonstrated; (for example, is there a test suite)?</li> @@ -445,11 +433,10 @@ address</a> <em>any</em> substantive review comment about a technical report in a timely manner. </p> Reviewers <em class="rfc2119">should</em> send substantive technical - reviews as early as possible. Working Groups <span class="from">(was - should)</span> are often reluctant to make <a href="#substantive-change">substantive - changes</a> to a mature document, <span class="new">particularly if this - would cause significant compatibility problems due to existing - implementation</span>. Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> + reviews as early as possible. Working Groups are often reluctant to make <a + href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> to a mature document, + particularly if this would cause significant compatibility problems due to + existing implementation. Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> record substantive or interesting proposals raised by reviews but not incorporated into a current specification. <h3>7.4 <a name="rec-advance" id="rec-advance">Advancing a Technical Report @@ -472,7 +459,7 @@ in maturity level, requiring a Working Group to conduct further work, and <em class="rfc2119">may</em> require the specification to return to a lower <a href="#maturity-level">maturity level</a>. The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> - <span class="from">(was in 7.4.6)</span> inform the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory + inform the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory Committee</a> and Working Group Chairs when a Working Group's request for a specification to advance in maturity level is declined and and the specification is returned to a Working Group for further work.</p> @@ -484,7 +471,7 @@ <ul> <li> <em class="rfc2119">should</em> document outstanding issues, and parts of the document on which the Working Group does not have - consensus.</li> + consensus, and</li> <li> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a Working Draft even if it is unstable and does not meet all Working Group requirements.</li> </ul> @@ -496,32 +483,31 @@ 4</a> of the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p> <h5 id="revised-wd">7.4.1.b Revised Public Working Drafts</h5> - <p class="new">A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish a - Working Draft to the W3C Technical Reports page when there have been - significant changes to the document that would benefit from review from - beyond the Working Group<em class="rfc2119"></em>. </p> - <p class="new">If 6 months elapse without significant changes to a - specification a Working Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish a - revised Working Draft, whose status section <em class="rfc2119">should</em> - indicate reasons for the lack of change. </p> - <p class="new"> </p> - <p>To publish a revised Working draft, a Working Group <span class="from">(copied - since this is not a new maturity level)</span> </p> + <p>A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish a Working Draft + to the W3C Technical Reports page when there have been significant changes + to the document that would benefit from review from beyond the Working + Group<em class="rfc2119"></em>. </p> + <p>If 6 months elapse without significant changes to a specification a + Working Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish a revised Working + Draft, whose status section <em class="rfc2119">should</em> indicate + reasons for the lack of change. </p> + <p> </p> + <p>To publish a revised Working draft, a Working Group </p> <ul> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> record the group's decision to request - publication. Consensus is not required, as this is a procedural step.</li> + publication. Consensus is not required, as this is a procedural step,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide public documentation of <a href="#substantive-change">substantive - changes</a> to the technical report since the previous Working Draft.</li> + changes</a> to the technical report since the previous Working Draft,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> provide public documentation of significant <a href="#editorial-change">editorial changes</a> to the - technical report since the previous step.</li> + technical report since the previous step,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> report which, if any, of the Working Group's requirements for this document have changed since the previous - step.</li> + step,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> report any changes in dependencies - with other groups.</li> + with other groups,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> document outstanding issues and parts - of the document on which the Working Group does not have consensus.</li> + of the document on which the Working Group does not have consensus, and</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a Working Draft even if it is unstable and does not meet all Working Group requirements.</li> </ul> @@ -539,20 +525,19 @@ <ul> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the specification has met all Working Group requirements, or explain why the requirements have changed - or been deferred.</li> + or been deferred,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document changes to dependencies during - the development of the specification. </li> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how adequate <a href="#implementation-experience"> - implementation experience</a> will be demonstrated.</li> + the development of the specification,</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how adequate <a href="#implementation-experience"> + implementation experience</a> will be demonstrated,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify the deadline for comments, which - <em class="rfc2119 changed">must</em> <span class="from">(was should)</span> - be at least four weeks after publication, <span class="new">and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> - be longer for complex documents.</span></li> - <li class="new">If the document has previously been published as a Last - Call Candidate Recommendation, <em class="rfc2119">must</em> document - the changes since the previous Last Call Candidate Recommendation. </li> - <li class="changed"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the - specification has received <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>.</li> + <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be at least four weeks after publication, + and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be longer for complex documents,</li> + <li>If the document has previously been published as a Last Call Candidate + Recommendation, <em class="rfc2119">must</em> document the changes + since the previous Last Call Candidate Recommendation, </li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the specification has received + <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>, and</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> identify features in the document that are considered "at risk". These features <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be removed before advancement to Recommendation without a requirement to @@ -576,12 +561,11 @@ expected next step)</li> <li><a href="#tr-end">Working Group Note</a></li> </ul> - <p class="new">If there are any <a href="#substantive-change">substantive - changes</a> made to a Last Call Candidate Recommendation other than to - remove features explicitly identified as "at risk", the Working Group <em - class="rfc2119">must</em> repeat the full process of publication as a - Last Call Candidate Recommendation before the Working Group can request - Recommendation status.</p> + <p>If there are any <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> + made to a Last Call Candidate Recommendation other than to remove features + explicitly identified as "at risk", the Working Group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> + repeat the full process of publication as a Last Call Candidate + Recommendation before the Working Group can request Recommendation status.</p> <p> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a> the decision to advance the technical report.</p> @@ -592,38 +576,35 @@ <p>To publish a Last Call Candidate Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation, a Working Group</p> <ul> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> republish the document, - identifying it as the basis of a Request for Recommendation.</li> - <li><span class="changed"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a - href="#implementation-experience">implementation experience</a>.</span><span - class="from">(said preferably should be two interoperable - implementations...)</span></li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> republish the document, identifying it + as the basis of a Request for Recommendation,</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation + experience</a>,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the document has received <a - href="#wide-review">wide review</a></li> + href="#wide-review">wide review,</a></li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that all issues raised during the Last Call Candidate Recommendation review period have been <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally - addressed</a>.</li> + addressed</a>,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em>identify any substantive issues raised since the close of the review period by parties other than Advisory - Committee representatives <span class="from">(was in 7.3)</span></li> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how the testing and + Committee representatives,</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how the testing and implementation requirements identified as part of the transition to Last - Call Candidate Recommendation have been met.</li> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are - tracked.</li> + Call Candidate Recommendation have been met,</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are tracked, and</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> remove features identified in the Last Call Candidate Recommendation document as "at risk" without repeating - the transition to Last Call Candidate Recommendation. <span class="from">(was - in 7.4.3)</span> </li> + the transition to Last Call Candidate Recommendation.</li> </ul> <p>The Director</p> <ul> - <li><span class="new"><em class="rfc2119">should not</em> provisionally - approve a Request for publication of a W3C Recommendation less than 35 - days after the publication of the Last Call Candidate Recommendation - on which is it based [editor's note - this is to allow for the patent - policy exclusion period to expire].</span></li> - <li><span class="new"><em class="rfc2119">may</em> provisionally approve a + <li><span><em class="rfc2119">should not</em> provisionally approve a + Request for publication of a W3C Recommendation less than 35 days + after the publication of the Last Call Candidate Recommendation on + which is it based [editor's note - this is to allow for the patent + policy exclusion period to expire], and<br> + </span></li> + <li><span><em class="rfc2119">may</em> provisionally approve a Recommendation with minimal implementation experience where there is a compelling reason to do so. In such a case, the Director <em class="rfc2119">should</em> explain the reasons for that decision. </span></li> @@ -632,38 +613,38 @@ a Recommendation</a> below)</h5> <p>To publish an Edited Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation, a Working Group</p> - <ul class="new"> + <ul> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> republish the document, identifying it - as the basis of a Request for Recommendation.</li> + as the basis of a Request for Recommendation,</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the document has received <a - href="#wide-review">wide review</a></li> + href="#wide-review">wide review, and<br> + </a></li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> address all errata.</li> </ul> - <h5>For <strong>all</strong> W3C Recommendations, in addition to meeting - the <a href="file:///Users/chaals/Documents/w3c/ab/AB/tr.html#transition-reqs">general + <h5 id="for-all-recs">For <strong>all</strong> W3C Recommendations, in + addition to meeting the <a href="file:///Users/chaals/Documents/w3c/ab/AB/tr.html#transition-reqs">general requirements for advancement</a>,</h5> <ul> <li>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the provisional approval of a Request for publication of a W3C Recommendation to the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory - Committee</a>.</li> + Committee</a>,</li> <li>The Advisory Committee review of the technical report <em class="rfc2119">must</em> continue at least 28 days after the announcement of provisional approval - to publish the Edited Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation. <span class="from">(was - 7.4.4)</span></li> + to publish the Edited Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation,</li> <li>If there was any <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#def-Dissent" rel="glossary" title="Definition of Dissent"><span class="dfn-instance">dissent</span></a> - in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director <span class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> - publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the general - public</span>, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally - address</a> the comment <span class="new">at least 14 days before - publication as a W3C Recommendation</span>. In this case the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory + in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> + publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C and the general + public, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally + address</a> the comment >at least 14 days before publication as a + W3C Recommendation. In this case the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory Committee</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a> - the decision.</li> + the decision,</li> <li>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication - of a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public.</li> - <li>The "Status of the Document" <em class="rfc2119 changed">must</em> - reflect whether it is provisionally approved, or published as a W3C + of a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public, and</li> + <li>The "Status of the Document" <em class="rfc2119">must</em> reflect + whether it is provisionally approved, or published as a W3C Recommendation.</li> </ul> <p>Possible next steps:</p> @@ -674,30 +655,26 @@ an Edited Recommendation</a>, or</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-rescind">rescinded</a>.</li> </ul> - <h3>7.5 <a name="tr-end" id="tr-end">Publishing a Working Group <span class="new">or - Interest Group</span> Note</a></h3> - <p class="new">Working Groups and Interest Groups publish material that is - not a formal specification as Notes. This may include supporting - documentation for a specification, such as requirements, use cases, - non-normative good practices and the like.</p> + <h3>7.5 <a name="tr-end" id="tr-end">Publishing a Working Group or Interest + Group Note</a></h3> + <p>Working Groups and Interest Groups publish material that is not a formal + specification as Notes. This may include supporting documentation for a + specification, such as requirements, use cases, non-normative good + practices and the like.</p> <p>Work on a technical report <em class="rfc2119">may</em> cease at any time. Work <em class="rfc2119 new">should</em> cease if W3C or a Working Group determines that it cannot productively carry the work any further. If the Director <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/groups.html#GeneralTermination">closes - a Working Group</a> W3C <em class="rfc2119 changed">must </em><span class="from">(was - should ...)</span> publish any unfinished specifications on the - Recommendation track as Working Group Notes. If a Working group decides, - or the Director requires the Working Group to discontinue work on a - technical report before completion <span class="changed">the Working - Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em></span> <span class="from">(... - but didn't say who should do this)</span> publish the document as a + a Working Group</a> W3C <em class="rfc2119">must </em> publish any + unfinished specifications on the Recommendation track as Working Group + Notes. If a Working group decides, or the Director requires the Working + Group to discontinue work on a technical report before completion the + Working Group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish the document as a Working Group Note. </p> - <p>In order to publish a Note a Working Group or Interest Group: <span class="from">(copied - since notes are excluded from the requirements to move to a new maturity - level)</span></p> + <p>In order to publish a Note a Working Group or Interest Group: </p> <ul> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> record the group's decision to request - advancement.</li> + advancement, and</li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> public documentation of significant changes to the technical report since the previous publication.</li> </ul> @@ -706,8 +683,8 @@ <li>End state: A technical report <em class="rfc2119">may</em> remain a Working Group Note indefinitely</li> <li>A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> resume work on the - technical report at any time, <span class="new">at the maturity level - the specification had before publication as a Note</span></li> + technical report at any time, at the maturity level the specification + had before publication as a Note</li> </ul> <p>The W3C Patent Policy does not specify any licensing requirements or commitments for Working Group Notes, only for W3C Recommendations. See @@ -790,12 +767,10 @@ Patent Policy</a> [<a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>] and in particular <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Requirements">section 5</a> (bullet 10) and <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-PAG-conclude">section - 7.5</a>. <span class="changed">A Working Group </span><span class="changed"><em - class="rfc2119">may</em> request the Director to rescind a - Recommendation which was a deliverable, or the Director </span><span class="changed"><em - class="rfc2119">may</em> directly propose to rescind a Recommendation. - </span><span class="from">(was "the Director calls for review when - satisfied that [it is necessary]")</span></p> + 7.5</a>. A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request the + Director to rescind a Recommendation which was a deliverable, or the + Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> directly propose to rescind a + Recommendation. </p> <p>To deprecate <em>part</em> of a Recommendation, W3C follows the process for <a href="#rec-modify">modifying a Recommendation</a>.</p> <p>Once W3C has published a Rescinded Recommendation, future W3C technical @@ -804,13 +779,12 @@ <p>To propose rescinding a W3C Recommendation, a Working Group or the Director</p> <ul> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> publish rationale for - rescinding the Recommendation.</li> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">should</em> document known - implementation.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> publish rationale for rescinding the + Recommendation.</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> document known implementation.</li> </ul> <p>In addition a Working Group proposing to rescind</p> - <ul class="new"> + <ul> <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the request to rescind has received <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a></li> <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> show that the request to rescind is @@ -818,8 +792,8 @@ </ul> <p>In addition the Director, if proposing to rescind</p> <ul> - <li class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the request to - rescind is based on public comment</li> + <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the request to rescind is + based on public comment</li> </ul> <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the proposal to rescind a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups, the public, and the <a @@ -835,14 +809,14 @@ </ul> <p>If there was any <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#def-Dissent" rel="glossary" title="Definition of Dissent"><span class="dfn-instance">dissent</span></a> - in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director <span class="new"><em class="rfc2119">must</em> - publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C <strong>and the - public</strong></span>, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally - address</a> the comment <span class="new">at least 14 days before - publication</span> as a Rescinded Recommendation. In this case the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory + in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> + publish the substantive content of the dissent to W3C <strong>and the + public</strong>, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally + address</a> the comment >at least 14 days before publication as a + Rescinded Recommendation. In this case the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory Committee</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="#ACAppeal">appeal</a> the decision.</p> - <h3>Good practices</h3> + <h3 id="good-practice">Good practices</h3> <p>Refer to <a href="https://www.w3.org/2003/05/Transitions">"How to Organize a Recommendation Track Transition"</a> in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/">Member guide</a> for practical information about preparing for the reviews and