tr.html
changeset 81 da213d049976
parent 80 be50d35fb50f
child 82 1ba31e1e8570
--- a/tr.html	Fri Feb 14 22:13:54 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Fri Feb 14 22:54:55 2014 +0100
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
             height="48" width="72"></a> </p>
       <h1 class="title" id="title">Recommendation Track Process draft proposal</h1>
       <h2 id="draft-shorthand-status"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium"></abbr>Editors'
-        Draft 5 February 2014</h2>
+        Draft 14 February 2014</h2>
       <dl>
         <dt>Current active version:</dt>
         <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html</a></dd>
@@ -52,15 +52,10 @@
         <p>This is a draft proposal to replace the <a href="http://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. </p>
-        <p>This draft incorporates changes following the meeting of the W3C
-          Advisory Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 3 February 2014. As
-          foreshadowed at that meeting and in email to the W3Process Community
-          Group, this draft re-establishes a Proposed Recommendation phase, and
-          clarifies the requirements for revising a Candidate Recommendation.</p>
-        <p>Because these are significant changes from recent drafts, careful
-          review is requested. It is quite possible that the changes introduced
-          in the new section 7.6 and in sections 7.5 and 7.7 include some
-          mistakes or new problems that need to be addressed.</p>
+        <p>This draft incorporates outstanding review comments following the
+          meeting of the W3C Advisory Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 3 February
+          2014. In particular it fixes some errors introduced with the
+          reintroduction of Proposed Recommendation in the last draft.</p>
         <p>This introductory section (before the chapter title below) will be
           removed when this chapter is re-incorporated into the full process
           document.</p>
@@ -77,14 +72,13 @@
           process will follow the <a href="http://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>
         <p>I am grateful to the W3C Advisory Board, the W3C Process Community
-          Group, Art Barstow, Robin Berjon, Wayne Carr, Marcos Cáceres, Elika
-          Etimad, Fantasai, Daniel Glazman, Ivan 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 progress of a W3C Recommendation-track
-          document. </p>
+          Group, Art Barstow, Robin Berjon, Wayne Carr, Marcos Cáceres,
+          Fantasai, Daniel Glazman, Ivan 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 progress of a W3C Recommendation-track document. </p>
         <p>Please send comments on this document to, or participate in, the <a
             href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/">W3C Process Community
             Group</a>. Issues related to this proposal are recorded in that
@@ -232,10 +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>
@@ -357,14 +351,9 @@
       <dt id="WGNote">Working Group Note, Interest Group Note (NOTE) </dt>
       <dd>A Working Group Note or Interest Group Note is published by a
         chartered Working Group or Interest Group to provide a stable reference
-        for a document that is not intended to be a specification requiring
-        conformance, but is nevertheless useful. Examples include supporting
-        documents such as Use case and Requirements documents, Design Principles
-        that explain what the Working Group was trying to achieve with a
-        specification, or '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>
+        for a useful document that is not intended to be a standard with
+        conformance requirements, or to document work that was abandoned without
+        producing a Recommendation.</dd>
       <dt id="RescindedRec">Rescinded Recommendation</dt>
       <dd>A Rescinded Recommendation is an entire Recommendation that W3C no
         longer endorses. See also clause 10 of the licensing requirements for
@@ -631,7 +620,7 @@
     </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>
-      begin an Advisory Committee Review of the specification on publication.</p>
+      begin an Advisory Committee Review of the specification.</p>
     <p> A Candidate Recommendation corresponds to a "Last Call Working Draft" as
       used in 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>].
@@ -653,8 +642,8 @@
     <h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised 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 Director <em class="rfc2119">must
-        not</em>&nbsp; approve the publication of a revised Candidate
+      explicitly identified as "at risk", the Working Group <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
+      obtain the Director's approval to publish a revised 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
@@ -808,12 +797,15 @@
         report to Recommendation</a>.</p>
     <h3 id="Note">7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</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, good practices and the
-      like, as well as specifications where work has been stopped and there is
-      no longer interest in making them a new standard.</p>
+      specification as Notes. This includes supporting documentation for a
+      specification such as explanations of design principles or use cases and
+      requirements, non-normative guides to good practices, as well as
+      specifications where work has been stopped and there is no longer interest
+      in making them a new standard.</p>
     <p>In order to publish a Note a Working Group or Interest Group: </p>
     <ul>
+      <li> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish a Note with or without its
+        prior publication as a Working Draft.</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> record the group's decision to request
         publication as a Note, and</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> publish documentation of significant
@@ -823,9 +815,9 @@
     <ul>
       <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, at the maturity level the specification
-        had before publication as a Note</li>
+      <li>A Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> resume work on technical
+        report within the scope of its charter at any time, at the maturity
+        level the specification had before publication as a Note</li>
     </ul>
     <p>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>]