Made explicit requirements that there are no substantive changes allowed between PR and REC, editorial tweaks to make links more clearly about Maturity Levels. Email thread from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Feb/0008.html
authorcharles
Mon, 17 Feb 2014 02:03:36 +0100
changeset 83 8cf3a8fdc3cf
parent 82 1ba31e1e8570
child 84 180d0da82c2e
Made explicit requirements that there are no substantive changes allowed between PR and REC, editorial tweaks to make links more clearly about Maturity Levels. Email thread from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Feb/0008.html
tr.html
--- a/tr.html	Fri Feb 14 22:57:04 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Mon Feb 17 02:03:36 2014 +0100
@@ -178,14 +178,14 @@
       <li><a href="#working-draft">7.3 Working Draft</a>
         <ul>
           <li><a href="#first-wd">7.3.1 First Public Working Draft</a></li>
-          <li><a href="#revised-wd">7.3.2 Revised Public Working Drafts</a></li>
+          <li><a href="#revised-wd">7.3.2 Revising Public Working Drafts</a></li>
           <li><a href="#tr-end"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">7.3.3
                 Stopping work on a specification</span></a></li>
         </ul>
       </li>
       <li><a href="#candidate-rec">7.4 Candidate Recommendation</a>
         <ul>
-          <li><a href="#revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
+          <li><a href="#revised-cr">7.4.1 Revising a Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
         </ul>
       </li>
       <li> <a href="#rec-pr">7.5 Proposed Recommendation</a></li>
@@ -226,10 +226,10 @@
         become a standard.</li>
     </ol>
     <p>Some W3C Notes are developed through successive Working Drafts, with an
-      expectation that they will become Notes, while others are simply published.
-      There are few formal requirements to publish a document as a W3C Note, and
-      they have no standing as a recommendation of W3C but are simply documents
-      preserved for historical reference.</p>
+      expectation that they will become Notes, while others are simply
+      published. There are few formal requirements to publish a document as a
+      W3C Note, and they have no standing as a recommendation of W3C but are
+      simply documents preserved for historical reference.</p>
     <p>Individual Working Groups and Interest Groups may adopt additional
       processes for developing publications, so long as they do not conflict
       with the requirements in this chapter.</p>
@@ -237,13 +237,13 @@
     <p>W3C follows these steps when advancing a technical report to
       Recommendation.</p>
     <ol>
-      <li><a href="#first-wd">Publication of the First Public Working Draft</a>,</li>
-      <li><a href="#hb-wd">Publication of zero or more revised Public Working
+      <li>Publication of the <a href="#first-wd">First Public Working Draft</a>,</li>
+      <li>Publication of zero or more revised <a href="#hb-wd">Public Working
           Drafts</a>.</li>
-      <li><a href="#last-call">Publication of a Candidate Recommendation</a>.</li>
-      <li><a href="#rec-pr">Publication of a Candidate Recommendation</a>.</li>
-      <li><a href="#rec-publication">Publication as a Recommendation</a>.</li>
-      <li>Possibly, <a href="#rec-edited">Publication as an Edited
+      <li>Publication of a <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a>.</li>
+      <li>Publication of a <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a>.</li>
+      <li>Publication as a <a href="#rec-publication">W3C Recommendation</a>.</li>
+      <li>Possibly, Publication as an <a href="#rec-edited">Edited
           Recommendation</a></li>
     </ol>
     <p>
@@ -553,7 +553,7 @@
       per <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section
         4</a> of the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C
         Patent Policy</a> [<a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>
-    <h4 id="revised-wd">7.3.2 Revised Public Working Drafts</h4>
+    <h4 id="revised-wd">7.3.2 Revising Public Working Drafts</h4>
     <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 beyond the Working Group<em
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@
       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>To publish a revised Working draft, a Working Group </p>
+    <p>To publish a revision of a 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>
@@ -579,7 +579,7 @@
     </ul>
     <p>Possible next steps for any Working Draft:</p>
     <ul>
-      <li><a href="#hb-wd">Revised Public Working Draft</a></li>
+      <li>Revised <a href="#hb-wd">Public Working Draft</a></li>
       <li><a href="#last-call">Candidate recommendation</a>.</li>
       <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
     </ul>
@@ -614,10 +614,10 @@
         complex documents,</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 Proposed Recommendation without a
-        requirement to publish a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> identify features in the document as "at
+        risk". These features <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be removed before
+        advancement to Proposed Recommendation without a requirement to publish
+        a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
     </ul>
     <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication of a
       Candidate Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
@@ -632,7 +632,7 @@
     <p>Possible next steps:</p>
     <ul>
       <li>Return to <a href="#hb-wd">Working Draft</a></li>
-      <li>Return to <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
+      <li>Revised <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
       <li><a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation status</a> (The expected
         next step)</li>
       <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
@@ -640,11 +640,11 @@
     <p> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory
         Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a>
       the decision to advance the technical report.</p>
-    <h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised Candidate Recommendation</h4>
+    <h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revising a Candidate Recommendation</h4>
     <p>If there are any <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a>
       made to a Candidate Recommendation other than to remove features
       explicitly identified as "at risk", the Working Group <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
-      obtain the Director's approval to publish a revised Candidate
+      obtain the Director's approval to publish a revision of a Candidate
       Recommendation. This is because substantive changes will generally require
       a new Exclusion Opportunity per <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section
         4</a> of the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C
@@ -664,10 +664,10 @@
         Candidate Recommendation, </li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the proposed changes have
         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 Proposed Recommendation without a
-        requirement to publish a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> identify features in the document as "at
+        risk". These features <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be removed before
+        advancement to Proposed Recommendation without a requirement to publish
+        a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
     </ul>
     <h3 id="rec-pr">7.5 Proposed Recommendation</h3>
     <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
@@ -706,15 +706,20 @@
       <li><span><em class="rfc2119">may</em> approve a Proposed 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>
+          explain the reasons for that decision.</span></li>
     </ul>
+    <p>Since a W3C Recommendation <span class="rfc2119">must not</span> include
+      any substantive changes from the Proposed Recommendation it is based on,
+      to make any substantive change to a Proposed Recommendation the Working
+      Group <span class="rfc2119">must</span> return the specification to
+      Candidate Recommendation or Working Draft.</p>
     <ul>
     </ul>
     <p>Possible Next Steps</p>
     <ul>
       <li>Return to <a href="#hb-wd">Working Draft</a></li>
       <li>Return to <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
-      <li><a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation status</a> (The expected
+      <li><a href="#rec-publication">Recommendation status</a> (The expected
         next step)</li>
       <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
     </ul>
@@ -726,6 +731,9 @@
     <ul>
       <li>A Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata
         are tracked, and</li>
+      <li>A Recommendation <span class="rfc2119">must not</span> include any
+        substantive changes from the Proposed Recommendation on which it is
+        based.</li>
       <li>If there was any <a href="http://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 <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
@@ -742,8 +750,8 @@
     <p>Possible next steps:</p>
     <p>A W3C Recommendation normally retains its status indefinitely. However it</p>
     <ul>
-      <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-modify">republished as
-          an Edited Recommendation</a>, or</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be republished as an <a href="#rec-modify">Edited
+          Recommendation</a>, or</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-rescind">rescinded</a>.</li>
     </ul>
     <h3 id="rec-modify">7.7 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</h3>