cover.html
author charles
Sat, 24 Dec 2016 00:58:22 +0100
changeset 219 ce74035784c8
parent 218 54a963be86ef
child 220 8d0fe573ea13
permissions -rw-r--r--
Add diff
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
  <head>
    <meta charset="utf-8">
    <meta name="keywords" content="W3C Process, Consortium, Team, Recommendation, Advisory Committee,
Advisory Board, Working Group, Coordination Group, Interest Group, W3C Activity, Workshop, charter, Working Draft, Process Document, Candidate Recommendation, Director, Proposed Recommendation, Submission request">
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="https://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/base.css">
    <title>World Wide Web Consortium Process Document</title>
    <style type="text/css">
     .about { margin-left: 3em; margin-right: 3em; font-size: .83em}
     table { margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto }
     .diagram { text-align: center; margin: 2.5em 0 }
      .issue:before {content: "Issue: "}
      .issue {border: 2px dashed red; background-color: #ffa;}
      .issue .issue {background-color: #fcc;}
      .rfc2119 {font-variant:small-caps}

/*for the SVG - navigation highlighting */

     :focus path, :focus polygon, :focus ellipse { stroke-width: 4}
     g g:hover path, g g:hover polygon, g g:hover ellipse { stroke-width: 4}
     :focus text, g g:hover text { stroke: black; stroke-width: .5}

</style> <!--[if lt IE 9]><script src='undefined://www.w3.org/2008/site/js/html5shiv.js'></script><![endif]-->
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="head"><a href="https://www.w3.org/"><img alt="W3C" src="https://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" height="48" width="72"></a>
      <h1>W3C Editor's Draft Process Document</h1>
      <h2 class="notoc">24 December 2016 Editor's Draft</h2>
      <dl>
        <dt>Latest Editor's version:</dt>
         <dd><a href="https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/cover.html">https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/cover.html</a></dd>
        <dt>Latest operative version:</dt>
         <dd><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/">https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/</a></dd>
        <dt>Editor:</dt>
         <dd>Charles McCathie Nevile, <a style="color:black" href="http://yandex.com"><span style="color: red;">Y</span>andex</a> —
           <a style="color:black" href="http://yandex.ru"><span style="color: red;">Я</span>ндекс</a></dd>
        <dt>Previous editor:</dt>
        <dd>Ian Jacobs, <a href="https://www.w3.org/">W3C</a></dd>
      </dl>

      <p class="copyright"><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright">Copyright</a> © 1996-2016
        <a href="/"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</abbr></a><sup>®</sup>
        (<a href="https://www.csail.mit.edu/"><abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr></a>,
        <a href="http://www.ercim.eu/"><abbr title="European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics">ERCIM</abbr></a>,
        <a href="http://www.keio.ac.jp/">Keio</a>, <a href="http://ev.buaa.edu.cn/">Beihang</a>), All Rights Reserved. W3C
        <a href="/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Legal_Disclaimer">liability</a>,
        <a href="/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#W3C_Trademarks">trademark</a>,
        <a rel="Copyright" href="/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">document use</a> and
        <a rel="Copyright" href="/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software">software licensing</a> rules apply. Your interactions
        with this site are in accordance with our <a href="/Consortium/Legal/privacy-statement#Public">public</a> and
        <a href="/Consortium/Legal/privacy-statement#Members">Member</a> privacy statements.</p>

      <hr></div>

    <h2 class="notoc"><a id="abstract">Abstract</a></h2>

    <p>The mission of the World Wide Web Consortium (<abbr>W3C</abbr>) is to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by
      developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability. The W3C Process Document describes 
      the organizational structure of the W3C and the processes related to the responsibilities and functions they exercise to
      enable W3C to accomplish its mission. This document does not describe the internal workings of the Team or W3C's public 
      communication mechanisms.</p>

    <p>For more information about the W3C mission and the history of W3C, please refer to
      <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/">About W3C</a> [<a href="#ref-mission">PUB15</a>].</p>

    <h2 class="notoc" id="status">Status of this Document</h2>

    <p>W3C, including all existing chartered groups, follows the
      <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/">most recent operative Process Document</a> announced to the Membership.</p>

    <p>This document is developed by the Advisory Board's Process Task Force working within the
      <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/">Revising W3C Process Community Group</a> (which anyone can join).
      This is the 15 October 2016 Editor's draft for the proposed next version of the W3C Process Document. This document is
      based on the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/">1 September 2015 Process Document</a>, which is the
      currently operative W3C Process.</p>

    <p>This draft has been approved by the Advisory Board to propose to the W3C director as the new operative Process document.
      This follows a formal review by W3C Advisory Committee Representatives. This revision incorporates minor editorial
      changes to the draft that was reviewed by the Advisory Committee.</p>

    <p>Further revision is expected to take place in a new version of the Process as required.</p>

    <p>A <a href="#changes">history of substantial changes</a> since the 1 September 2015 Process Document is provided. A log of
      <a href="https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/">all changes in diff format</a> is available, as is an
      <a href="https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/161224-150901-diff.html">"HTML diff-marked" comparison</a>
      to the 1 September document</a>.</p>

    <p>Comment is invited on the draft. Please send comments to
      <a href="mailto:public-w3process@w3.org">public-w3process@w3.org</a>
     (<a href="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/">Mailing list archive</a>, publicly available) or to
     process-issues@w3.org (<a href="https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/process-issues">Member-only archive</a>). A
     <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/">Public Issue Tracker</a> is available online. </p>

    <h2 class="notoc" id="pp">Relation of Process Document to Patent Policy</h2>

    <p>W3C Members' attention is called to the fact that provisions of the Process Document are binding on Members per the
      <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Agreement/Member-Agreement">Membership Agreement</a>
      [<a href="#ref-member-agreement">PUB6</a>]. The Patent Policy
      <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
      is incorporated by normative reference as a part of the Process Document, and is thus equally binding.</p>

    <p>The Patent Policy places additional obligations on Members, Team, and other participants in W3C.
      The Process Document does not restate those requirements but includes references to them.
      The Process Document and Patent Policy have been designed to allow them to evolve independently.</p>

    <p>In the Process Document, the term "participant" refers to an individual, not an organization.</p>

    <h2 class=".notoc">Conformance and specialized terms</h2>

    <p>The terms <em class="rfc2119">must</em>, <em class="rfc2119">must not</em>, <em class="rfc2119">should</em>,
      <em class="rfc2119">should not</em>, <em class="rfc2119">required</em>, and <em class="rfc2119">may</em> are used
      in accordance with <a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt">RFC 2119</a> [<a href="#ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>].
      The term <dfn><em class="rfc2119">not required</em></dfn> is equivalent to the term
      <em class="rfc2119">may</em> as defined in [<a href="#ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>].</p>

    <p>Some terms have been capitalized in this document (and in other W3C materials) to indicate that they are entities
      with special relevance to the W3C Process. These terms are defined within this document, and readers are reminded that the
      ordinary English definitions are insufficient for the purpose of understanding this document.</p>

    <div class="toc" role="navigation">
      <h2 class="notoc" id="toc">Table of Contents</h2>
      <div class="noprint">
        <ul class="toc">
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Intro" class="tocxref">1 Introduction</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Organization" class="tocxref">2 Members, Advisory Committee, Team, Advisory Board, Technical
              Architecture Group</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Policies" class="tocxref">3 General Policies for W3C Groups</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#dissemination" class="tocxref">4 Dissemination Policies</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAGeneral" class="tocxref">5 Working Groups and Interest Groups</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Reports" class="tocxref">6 W3C Technical Report Development Process</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#ReviewAppeal" class="tocxref">7 Advisory Committee Reviews, Appeals, and Votes</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAEvents" class="tocxref">8 Workshops and Symposia</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Liaisons" class="tocxref">9 Liaisons</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Submission" class="tocxref">10 Member Submission Process</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAProcess" class="tocxref">11 Process Evolution</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#references" class="tocxref">12 References</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#acks" class="tocxref">13 Acknowledgments</a></li>
          <li class="tocline2"><a href="#changes" class="tocxref">14 Changes</a></li>
        </ul>
      </div>
    </div>
    <div class="longtoc">
      <div class="noprint">
        <h3 class="notoc" id="fulltoc">Expanded table of contents</h3>
      </div>
      <ul class="toc">
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Intro">1 Introduction</a></li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Organization">2 Members, Advisory Committee, Team, Advisory Board, Technical Architecture Group</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#Members">2.1 Members</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#MemberBenefits">2.1.1 Rights of Members</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#RelatedAndConsortiumMembers">2.1.2 Member Consortia, and Related Members</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#AC">2.1.3 Advisory Committee (AC)</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#Team">2.2 The W3C Team</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#TeamSubmission">2.2.1 Team Submissions</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#AB">2.3 Advisory Board (AB)</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#ABParticipation">2.3.1 Advisory Board Participation</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#TAG">2.4 Technical Architecture Group (TAG)</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#tag-participation">2.4.1 Technical Architecture Group Participation</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#AB-TAG-participation">2.5 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Participation</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#AB-TAG-constraints">2.5.1 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Participation
                    Constraints</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#AB-TAG-elections">2.5.2 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Elections</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#AB-TAG-vacated">2.5.3 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Vacated Seats</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Policies">3 General Policies for W3C Groups</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#ParticipationCriteria">3.1 Individual Participation Criteria</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#coi">3.1.1 Conflict of Interest Policy</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#member-rep">3.1.2 Individuals Representing a Member Organization</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#GeneralMeetings">3.2 Meetings</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#Consensus">3.3 Consensus</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#managing-dissent">3.3.1 Managing Dissent</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#WGArchiveMinorityViews">3.3.2 Recording and Reporting Formal Objections</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#formal-address">3.3.3 Formally Addressing an Issue</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#WGChairReopen">3.3.4 Reopening a Decision When Presented With New Information</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#Votes">3.4 Votes</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#WGAppeals">3.5 Appeal of a Chair's Decision</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#resignation">3.6 Resignation from a Group</a></li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#dissemination">4 Dissemination Policies</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#confidentiality-levels">4.1 Confidentiality Levels</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#confidentiality-change">4.1.1 Changing Confidentiality Level</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAGeneral">5 Working Groups and Interest Groups</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#ReqsAllGroups">5.1 Requirements for All Working and Interest Groups</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#GroupsWG">5.2 Working Groups and Interest Groups</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#group-participation">5.2.1 Working Group and Interest Group Participation Requirements</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#WGCharterDevelopment">5.2.2 Working Group and Interest Group Charter Development</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#CharterReview">5.2.3 Advisory Committee Review of a Working Group or Interest Group Charter</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#cfp">5.2.4 Call for Participation in a Working Group or Interest Group</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#charter-extension">5.2.5 Working Group and Interest Group Charter Extension</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#WGCharter">5.2.6 Working Group and Interest Group Charters</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#GeneralTermination">5.2.7 Working Group and Interest Group Closure</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Reports">6 W3C Technical Report Development Process</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li><a href="#rec-advance">6.1 W3C Technical Reports</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li><a href="#recs-and-notes" id="return-to-wg">6.1.1 Recommendations and Notes</a></li>
                <li><a href="#maturity-levels">6.1.2 Maturity Levels</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li><a href="#requirements-and-definitions">6.2 General requirements and definitions</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li><a href="#general-requirements">6.2.1 General requirements for Technical Reports</a></li>
                <li><a href="#transition-reqs">6.2.2 Advancement on the Recommendation Track</a>
                  <ul class="toc">
                    <li><a href="#substantive-change">6.2.2.1 Substantive Change</a></li>
                  </ul>
                </li>
                <li><a href="#doc-reviews">6.2.3 Reviews and Review Responsibilities</a>
                  <ul class="toc">
                    <li><a href="#wide-review">6.2.3.1 Wide Review</a></li>
                  </ul>
                </li>
                <li><a href="#implementation-experience">6.2.4 Implementation Experience</a> </li>
                <li><a href="#correction-classes">6.2.5 Classes of Changes to a Recommendation</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li><a href="#working-draft">6.3 Working Draft</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li><a href="#first-wd">6.3.1 First Public Working Draft</a></li>
                <li><a href="#revised-wd">6.3.2 Revising Public Working Drafts</a></li>
                <li><a href="#tr-end">6.3.3 Stopping work on a specification</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li><a href="#candidate-rec" id="cfi">6.4 Candidate Recommendation</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li><a href="#revised-cr">6.4.1 Revising a Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li> <a href="#rec-pr" id="cfr">6.5 Proposed Recommendation</a></li>
            <li> <a href="#rec-publication">6.6 W3C Recommendation</a></li>
            <li><a href="#rec-modify">6.7 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li><a href="#errata">6.7.1 Errata Management</a></li>
                <li><a href="#revised-rec" id="cfr-edited">6.7.2 Revising a Recommendation</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li><a href="#Note">6.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</a></li>
            <li><a href="#rec-rescind">6.9 Obsoleting or Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</a></li>
            <li><a href="#further-reading">6.10 Further reading</a></li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#ReviewAppeal">7 Advisory Committee Reviews, Appeals, and Votes</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#ACReview">7.1 Advisory Committee Reviews</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#ACReviewStart">7.1.1 Start of a Review Period</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#ACReviewAfter">7.1.2 After the Review Period</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#ACAppeal">7.2 Appeal by Advisory Committee Representatives</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#ACVotes">7.3 Advisory Committee Votes</a></li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAEvents">8 Workshops and Symposia</a></li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Liaisons">9 Liaisons</a></li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#Submission">10 Member Submission Process</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#SubmissionRights">10.1 Submitter Rights and Obligations</a>
              <ul class="toc">
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#SubmissionScope">10.1.1 Scope of Member Submissions</a></li>
                <li class="tocline4"><a href="#SubmissionReqs">10.1.2 Information Required in a Submission Request</a></li>
              </ul>
            </li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#TeamSubmissionRights">10.2 Team Rights and Obligations</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#SubmissionYes">10.3 Acknowledgment of a Submission Request</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#SubmissionNo">10.4 Rejection of a Submission Request</a></li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#GAProcess">11 Process Evolution</a></li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#references">12 References</a>
          <ul class="toc">
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#public-refs">12.1 Public Resources</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#member-refs">12.2 Member-only Resources</a></li>
            <li class="tocline3"><a href="#other-refs">12.3 Other References</a></li>
          </ul>
        </li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#acks">13 Acknowledgments</a></li>
        <li class="tocline2"><a href="#changes">14 Changes</a></li>
      </ul>
    </div>

    <main>

      <h2 id="Intro">1 Introduction</h2>

      <p>Most W3C work revolves around the standardization of Web technologies. To accomplish this work, W3C follows processes that
        promote the development of high-quality standards based on the <a href="#Consensus">consensus</a> of the Membership, Team, 
        and public. W3C processes promote fairness, responsiveness, and progress: all facets of the W3C mission.
        This document describes the processes W3C follows in pursuit of its mission.</p>

      <p>Here is a general overview of how W3C standardizes a Web technology. In many cases, the goal of this work is a
        <a href="#RecsW3C">W3C Recommendation</a> - a Web standard.</p>

      <ol>
        <li>People generate interest in a particular topic. For instance, Members express interest in the form 
          of <a href="#Submission">Member Submissions</a>, and the <a href="#Team">Team</a> monitors work inside and outside of W3C
          for signs of interest. Also, W3C is likely to organize a <a href="#GAEvents">Workshop</a> to bring people together to 
          discuss topics that interest the W3C community.</li>
        <li>When there is enough interest in a topic (e.g., after a successful Workshop and/or discussion on an
          <a href="#ACCommunication">Advisory Committee mailing list</a>), the Director announces the development of a proposal for
          one or more new <a href="#WGCharterDevelopment">Interest Group or Working Group charters</a>, depending on the breadth of
          the topic of interest. W3C Members <a href="#CharterReview">review</a> the proposed charters. When there is support
          within W3C for investing resources in the topic of interest, the Director approves the group(s) and they begin their
          work.</li>
        <li>There are three types of Working Group participants: <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a>,
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a>, and <a href="#Team">Team representatives</a>. Team representatives both
          contribute to the technical work and help ensure the group's proper integration with the rest of W3C. The
          <a href="#WGCharter">Working Group charter</a> sets expectations about each group's deliverables (e.g.,
          <a href="#Reports">technical reports</a>, test suites, and tutorials).</li>
        <li>Working Groups generally create specifications and guidelines that undergo cycles of revision and review as they
          <a href="#rec-advance">advance to W3C Recommendation</a> status. The W3C process for producing these technical reports
          includes significant review by the Members and public, and requirements that the Working Group be able to show 
          implementation and interoperability experience. At the end of the process, the Advisory Committee reviews the mature
          technical report, and if there is support, W3C publishes it as a <a href="#RecsW3C">Recommendation</a>.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>The Process Document promotes the goals of quality and fairness in technical decisions by encouraging
        <a href="#Consensus">consensus</a>, requiring reviews (by both Members and public) as part of the
        <a href="#Reports">technical report development process</a>, and through an
        <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal process</a>.</p>

      <p>The other sections of the Process Document:</p>
      <ol>
        <li>set forth <a href="#Policies">policies</a> for participation in W3C groups,</li>
        <li>establish two permanent groups within W3C: the <a href="#TAG">Technical Architecture Group (TAG)</a>, to help resolve
          Consortium-wide technical issues; and the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board (AB)</a>, to help resolve
          Consortium-wide non-technical issues, and to manage the <a href="#GAProcess">evolution of the W3C process</a>, and</li>
        <li>describe other interactions between the <a href="#Members">Members</a> (as represented by the
          <a href="#AC">W3C Advisory Committee</a>), the Team, and the general public.</li>
      </ol>

      <h2 id="Organization">2 Members, Advisory Committee, Team, Advisory Board, Technical Architecture Group</h2>

      <p>W3C's mission is to lead the Web to its full potential. W3C <a href="#Members">Member</a> organizations
        provide resources to this end, and the W3C <a href="#Team">Team</a> provides the technical leadership
        and organization to coordinate the effort.</p>

      <h3 id="Members">2.1 Members</h3>

      <p>W3C Members are primarily represented in W3C processes as follows:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>The <a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a> is composed of one representative from each Member organization (refer to the
          <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a> list of
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/ACList">current Advisory Committee representatives</a>
          [<a href="#ref-current-ac">MEM1</a>]).
          The Advisory Committee:
          <ul>
            <li>reviews plans for W3C at each <a href="#ACMeetings">Advisory Committee meeting</a>;</li>
            <li>reviews formal proposals from the W3C Director: <a href="#CharterReview">Charter Proposals</a>,
            <a href="#RecsPR">Proposed Recommendations</a>, and <a href="#GAProcess">Proposed Process Documents</a>.</li>
            <li>elects the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a> participants other than the Advisory Board Chair.</li>
            <li>elects 5 of the 9 participants on the <a href="#TAG">Technical Architecture Group</a>.</li>
          </ul>

          Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an 
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> in some cases described in this document.</li>

        <li>Representatives of Member organizations participate in <a href="#GAGeneral">Working Groups and Interest Groups</a> and
          author and review <a href="#Reports">technical reports</a>.</li>
      </ol>

      <p id="MemberSubscription">W3C membership is open to all entities, as described in
        "<a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/join">How to Join W3C</a>" [<a href="#ref-join-w3c">PUB5</a>];
        (refer to the public list of <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List">current W3C Members</a>
        [<a href="#ref-current-mem">PUB8</a>]). Organizations subscribe according to the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Agreement/Member-Agreement">Membership Agreement</a>
        [<a href="#ref-member-agreement">PUB6</a>]. The <a href="#Team">Team</a> <em class="rfc2119">must</em> ensure that
        Member participation agreements remain <a href="#Team-only">Team-only</a> and that no Member receives
        preferential treatment within W3C.</p>

      <p id="IndividualParticipation">W3C does not have a class of membership tailored to, or priced for individuals.
        However, an individual <em class="rfc2119">may</em> join W3C as an Affiliate Member. In this case the same
        restrictions pertaining to <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a> apply when the individual also
        <a href="#member-rep">represents</a> another W3C Member.</p>

      <h4 id="MemberBenefits">2.1.1 Rights of Members</h4>

      <p>Each Member organization enjoys the following rights and benefits:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>A seat on the <a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a>;</li>
        <li>Access to <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a> information;</li>
        <li>The <a href="#Submission">Member Submission</a> process;</li>
        <li>Use of the W3C Member logo on promotional material and to publicize the Member's participation in W3C. For more
          information, please refer to the Member logo usage policy described in the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Intro">New Member Orientation</a> [<a href="#ref-new-member">MEM4</a>].</li>
      </ul>

      <p>Furthermore,  subject to further restrictions included in the Member Agreement, representatives of Member organizations
        participate in W3C as follows:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>In <a href="#GAGeneral">Working Groups and Interest Groups</a>.</li>
        <li>In <a href="#GAEvents">Workshops and Symposia</a>;</li>
        <li>On the Team, as <a href="#fellows">W3C Fellows</a>.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>The rights and benefits of W3C membership are contingent upon conformance to the processes described in this document.
        The vast majority of W3C Members faithfully follow the spirit as well as the letter of these processes. When
        serious and/or repeated violations do occur, and repeated attempts to address these violations have not
        resolved the situation, the  Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> take disciplinary action.
        Arbitration in the case of further disagreement is governed by paragraph 19 of the Membership Agreement. Refer to the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/09/discipline">Guidelines for Disciplinary Action</a>
        [<a href="#ref-discipline-gl">MEM14</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="RelatedAndConsortiumMembers">2.1.2 Membership Consortia and related Members</h4>

      <h5 id="MemberConsortia">2.1.2.1 Membership Consortia</h5>

      <p>A "Member Consortium" means a consortium, user society, or association of two or more individuals, companies,
        organizations or governments, or any combination of these entities which has the purpose of participating in a
        common activity or pooling resources to achieve a common goal other than participation in, or achieving certain goals in,
        W3C. A joint-stock corporation or similar entity is not a "Member Consortium" merely because it has shareholders or
        stockholders.  If it is not clear whether a prospective Member qualifies as a Member Consortium, the Director may
        reasonably make the determination. For a Member Consortium, the rights and privileges of W3C Membership described in the
        W3C Process Document extend to the Member Consortium's paid staff and Advisory Committee representative.</p>

      <p>Member Consortia <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also designate up to four (or more at the Team's discretion) individuals
        who, though not employed by the organization, <em class="rfc2119">may</em> exercise the rights of
        <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a>.

      <p>For Member Consortia that have individual people as members these individuals <em class="rfc2119">must</em> disclose
        their employment affiliation when participating in W3C work. Provisions for <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>
        apply. Furthermore, these individuals <em class="rfc2119">must</em> represent the broad interests of the
        W3C Member organization and not the particular interests of their employers.</p>

      <p>For Member Consortia that have organizations as Members, all such designated representatives
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be an official representative of the Member organization
        (e.g. a Committee or Task Force Chairperson) and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> disclose their employment affiliation
        when participating in W3C work. Provisions for <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a> apply. 
        Furthermore, these individuals <em class="rfc2119">must</em> represent the broad interests of the W3C Member organization
        and not the particular interests of their employers.</p>

      <p>For all representatives of a Member Consortium, IPR commitments are made on behalf of the Member Consortium, unless a
        further IPR commitment is made by the individuals' employers.</p>

      <h5 id="MemberRelated">2.1.2.2 Related Members</h5>

      <p>In the interest of ensuring the integrity of the consensus process, Member involvement in some of the processes in this
        document is affected by related Member status. As used herein, two Members are related if:</p>
      <ol>
        <li>Either Member is a subsidiary of the other, or</li>
        <li>Both Members are subsidiaries of a common entity, or</li>
        <li>The Members have an employment contract or consulting contract that affects W3C participation.</li>
      </ol>
      <p>A <em>subsidiary</em> is an organization of which effective control and/or majority ownership rests with another, single
        organization.</p>
      <p>Related Members <em class="rfc2119">must</em> disclose these relationships according to the mechanisms described in the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Intro">New Member Orientation</a> [<a href="#ref-new-member">MEM4</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="AC">2.1.3 Advisory Committee (AC)</h4>

      <p>When an organization joins W3C (see "<a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/join">How to Join W3C</a>"
        [<a href="#ref-join-w3c">PUB5</a>]), it <em class="rfc2119">must</em> name its Advisory Committee representative as part
        of the Membership Agreement. The <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Intro">New Member Orientation</a> explains how to
        subscribe or unsubscribe to Advisory Committee mailing lists, provides information about Advisory Committee Meetings,
        explains how to name a new Advisory Committee representative, and more. Advisory Committee representatives
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> follow the <a href="#coi">conflict of interest policy</a> by disclosing information
        according to the mechanisms described in the New Member Orientation. See also the additional roles of
        Advisory Committee representatives described in the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>
      <p>Additional information for Members is available at the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/">Member Web site</a>
       [<a href="#ref-member-web">MEM6</a>].</p>

      <h5 id="ACCommunication">2.1.3.1 Advisory Committee Mailing Lists</h5>
      <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide two mailing lists for use by the Advisory Committee:</p>
      <ol>
        <li>One for official announcements (e.g., those required by this document) from the Team to the Advisory Committee.
          This list is read-only for Advisory Committee representatives.</li>
        <li>One for discussion among Advisory Committee representatives. Though this list is primarily for Advisory Committee
          representatives, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> monitor discussion and <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
          participate in discussion when appropriate. Ongoing detailed discussions <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be moved
          to other appropriate lists (new or existing, such as a mailing list created for a <a href="#GAEvents">Workshop</a>).</li>
      </ol>
      <p>An Advisory Committee representative <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request that additional individuals from their
        organization be subscribed to these lists. Failure to contain distribution internally <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
        result in suspension of additional email addresses, at the discretion of the Team.</p>

      <h5 id="ACMeetings">2.1.3.2 Advisory Committee Meetings</h5>
      <p>The Team organizes a <a href="#ftf-meeting">face-to-face meeting</a> for the Advisory Committee 
        <span class="time-interval">twice a year</span>. The Team appoints the Chair of these meetings (generally the CEO).
        At each Advisory Committee meeting, the Team <em class="rfc2119">should</em> provide an update to the
        Advisory Committee about:</p>
      <dl>
        <dt><em>Resources</em></dt>
        <dd>
          <ul>
            <li>The number of W3C Members at each level.</li>
            <li>An overview of the financial status of W3C.</li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
        <dt><em>Allocations</em></dt>
        <dd>
          <ul>
            <li>The allocation of the annual budget, including size of the Team and their approximate deployment.</li>
            <li>A list of all activities (including but not limited to Working and Interest Groups) and brief status statement
              about each, in particular those started or terminated since the previous Advisory Committee meeting.</li>
            <li>The allocation of resources to pursuing <a href="#Liaisons">liaisons</a> with other organizations.</li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
      </dl>
      <p>Each Member organization <em class="rfc2119">should</em> send one <a href="#member-rep">representative</a> to each
        Advisory Committee Meeting. In exceptional circumstances (e.g., during a period of transition between representatives
        from an organization),
        the meeting Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> allow a Member organization to send two representatives to a meeting.</p>
      <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the date and location of each Advisory Committee meeting no later than
        at the end of the previous meeting; <span class="time-interval">one year's</span> notice is preferred. The Team
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
        announce the region of each Advisory Committee meeting at least <span class="time-interval">one year</span> in advance.</p>
      <p>More information about <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/">Advisory Committee meetings</a>
        [<a href="#ref-ac-meetings">MEM5</a>] is available at the Member Web site.</p>

      <h3 id="Team">2.2 The W3C Team</h3>

      <p>The Team consists of the Director, CEO, W3C paid staff, unpaid interns, and W3C Fellows.
        <dfn id="fellows">W3C Fellows</dfn> are Member employees working as part of the Team; see the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Recruitment/Fellows">W3C Fellows Program</a> [<a href="#ref-fellows">PUB32</a>].
        The Team provides technical leadership about Web technologies, organizes and manages W3C activities to reach goals within
        practical constraints (such as resources available), and communicates with the Members and the public about 
        the Web and W3C technologies.</p>
      <p>The Director and CEO <em class="rfc2119">may</em> delegate responsibility (generally to other individuals in the Team)
        for any of their roles described in this document.</p>

      <p>The <dfn id="def-Director">Director</dfn> is the lead technical architect at W3C. His responsibilities are identified
        throughout this document in relevant places. Some key ones include: assessing
        <a href="#def-Consensus" id="DirectorDecision">consensus</a> within W3C for architectural choices, publication of
        <a href="#Reports">technical reports</a>, and chartering new Groups; appointing group <a href="#GeneralChairs">Chairs</a>;
        adjudicating as "tie-breaker" for <a href="#WGAppeals">Group decision appeals</a> and deciding on the outcome of formal
        objections; the Director is generally Chair of the <a href="#TAG">TAG</a>.</p>

      <p>Team administrative information such as Team salaries, detailed budgeting, and other business decisions are
        <a href="#Team-only">Team-only</a>, subject to oversight by the Host institutions.</p>
      <p><strong>Note:</strong> W3C is not currently incorporated. For legal contracts, W3C is represented by four
        <dfn id="hosts">"Host" institutions</dfn>: Beihang University,
        the European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics (<abbr>ERCIM</abbr>),
        Keio University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (<abbr>MIT</abbr>). Within W3C, the Host institutions are
        governed by hosting agreements; the Hosts themselves are not W3C Members.</p>

      <h4 id="TeamSubmission">2.2.1 Team Submissions</h4>

      <p>Team members <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request that the Director publish information at the W3C Web site.
        At the Director's discretion, these documents are published as "Team Submissions". These documents are analogous to
        <a href="#Submission">Member Submissions</a> (e.g., in <a href="#SubmissionScope">expected scope</a>). However, there is
        no additional Team comment. The <a href="#DocumentStatus">document status section</a> of a Team Submission indicates
        the level of Team consensus about the published material.</p>
      <p>Team Submissions are <strong>not</strong> part of the <a href="#Reports">technical report development process</a>.</p>
      <p>The list of <a href="https://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/">published Team Submissions</a>
        [<a href="#ref-team-submission-list">PUB16</a>] is available at the W3C Web site.</p>

      <h3 id="AB">2.3 Advisory Board (AB)</h3>

      <p>Created in March 1998, the Advisory Board provides ongoing guidance to the Team on issues of strategy, management,
        legal matters, process, and conflict resolution. The Advisory Board also serves the Members by tracking issues raised
        between Advisory Committee meetings, soliciting Member comments on such issues, and proposing actions to resolve these 
        issues. The Advisory Board manages the <a href="#GAProcess">evolution of the Process Document</a>. The Advisory Board hears
        a <a href="#SubmissionNo">Submission Appeal</a> when a Member Submission is rejected for reasons unrelated to Web
        architecture; see also the <a href="#TAG">TAG</a>.</p>

      <p>The Advisory Board is <strong>not</strong> a board of directors and has no decision-making authority within W3C;
        its role is strictly advisory.</p>

      <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> make available a mailing list for the Advisory Board to use for its 
        communication,confidential to the Advisory Board and Team.</p>

      <p>The Advisory Board <em class="rfc2119">should</em> send a summary of each of its meetings to the Advisory Committee
        and other group Chairs. The Advisory Board <em class="rfc2119">should</em> also report on its activities at each
        <a href="#ACMeetings">Advisory Committee meeting</a>.</p>

      <p>Details about the Advisory Board (e.g., the list of Advisory Board participants, mailing list information, and
        summaries of Advisory Board meetings) are available at the 
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/ab/">Advisory Board home page</a> [<a href="#ref-ab-home">PUB30</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="ABParticipation">2.3.1 Advisory Board Participation</h4>

      <p>The Advisory Board consists of nine elected participants and a Chair. The Team appoints the Chair of the
        <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a>, who is generally the CEO.</p>

      <p>The remaining nine Advisory Board participants are elected by the W3C Advisory Committee following the
        <a href="#AB-TAG-elections">AB/TAG nomination and election process</a>.</p>

      <p>With the exception of the Chair, the terms of all Advisory Board participants are for
        <span class="time-interval">two years</span>. Terms are staggered so that each year, either four or five terms expire.
        If an individual is elected to fill an incomplete term, that individual's term ends at the normal expiration date of
        that term. Regular Advisory Board terms begin on 1 July and end on 30 June.</p>

      <h3 id="TAG">2.4 Technical Architecture Group (TAG)</h3>

      <p>Created in February 2001, the mission of the TAG is stewardship of the Web architecture. There are three aspects to
        this mission:</p>
      <ol>
        <li>to document and build consensus around principles of Web architecture and to interpret and clarify these
          principles when necessary;</li>
        <li>to resolve issues involving general Web architecture brought to the TAG;</li>
        <li>to help coordinate cross-technology architecture developments inside and outside W3C.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>The TAG hears a <a href="#SubmissionNo">Submission Appeal</a> when a Member Submission is rejected for reasons related
        to Web architecture; see also the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a>.</p>

      <p>The TAG's scope is limited to technical issues about Web architecture. The TAG <em class="rfc2119">should not</em>
        consider administrative, process, or organizational policy issues of W3C, which are generally addressed by the
        W3C Advisory Committee, Advisory Board, and Team. Please refer to the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-tag">TAG charter</a> [<a href="#ref-tag-charter">PUB25</a>]
        for more information about the background and scope of the TAG, and the expected qualifications of TAG participants.</p>

      <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> make available two mailing lists for the TAG:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>a public discussion (not just input) list for issues of Web architecture. The TAG will conduct its public business
          on this list.</li>
        <li>a <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a> list for discussions within the TAG and for requests to the TAG that,
          for whatever reason, cannot be made on the public list.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>The TAG <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also request the creation of additional topic-specific, public mailing lists.
        For some TAG discussions (e.g.,  a <a href="#SubmissionNo">Submission Appeal</a>), the TAG <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
        use a list that will be <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a>.</p>

      <p>The TAG <em class="rfc2119">should</em> send a summary of each of its <a href="#GeneralMeetings">meetings</a> to the
        Advisory Committee and other group Chairs. The TAG <em class="rfc2119">should</em> also report on its activities at each
        <a href="#ACMeetings">Advisory Committee meeting</a>.</p>

      <p>When the TAG votes to resolve an issue, each TAG participant (whether appointed, elected, or the Chair) has one vote;
        see also the section on <a href="https://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-tag#Voting">voting in the TAG charter</a>
       [<a href="#ref-tag-charter">PUB25</a>] and the general section on <a href="#Votes">votes</a> in this Process Document.</p>

      <p>Details about the TAG (e.g., the list of TAG participants, mailing list information, and summaries of TAG meetings)
        are available at the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/">TAG home page</a> [<a href="#ref-tag-home">PUB26</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="tag-participation">2.4.1 Technical Architecture Group Participation</h4>

      <p>The TAG consists of eight elected or appointed participants and a Chair. The Team appoints the Chair of the TAG,
        who is generally the <a href="#def-Director">Director</a>.</p>

      <p>Three TAG participants are appointed by the Director. Appointees are <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> to be
        on the W3C Team. The Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> appoint <a href="#fellows">W3C Fellows</a> to the TAG.</p>

      <p>The remaining five TAG participants are elected by the W3C Advisory Committee following the
        <a href="#AB-TAG-elections">AB/TAG nomination and election process</a>.</p>

      <p>With the exception of the Chair, the terms of all TAG participants are for <span class="time-interval">two years</span>.
        Terms are staggered so that each year, either two or three elected terms, and either one or two appointed terms expire.
        If an individual is appointed or elected to fill an incomplete term, that individual's term ends at the normal
        expiration date of that term. Regular TAG terms begin on 1 February and end on 31 January.</p>

      <h3 id="AB-TAG-participation">2.5 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Participation</h3>

      <p>Advisory Board and TAG participants have a special role within W3C: they are elected by the Membership and
        appointed by the Director with the expectation that they will use their best judgment to find the best solutions
        for the Web, not just for any particular network, technology, vendor, or user. Advisory Board and TAG participants
        are expected to participate regularly and fully. Advisory Board and TAG participants <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        attend <a href="#ACMeetings">Advisory Committee meetings</a>.</p>

      <p>An individual participates on the Advisory Board or TAG from the moment the individual's term begins until the term ends
        or the seat is <a href="#AB-TAG-vacated">vacated</a>. Although Advisory Board and TAG participants do not advocate for
        the commercial interests of their employers, their participation does carry the responsibilities associated with
        Member representation, Invited Expert status, or Team representation (as described in the section on the
        <a href="#AB-TAG-elections">AB/TAG nomination and election process</a>). See also the licensing obligations on
        TAG participants in <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Obligations">section 3</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>],
        and the claim exclusion process of <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a>.</p>

      <h4 id="AB-TAG-constraints">2.5.1 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Participation Constraints</h4>

      <p>Given the few seats available on the Advisory Board and the TAG, and in order to ensure that the diversity of
        W3C Members is represented:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>A Member organization is permitted at most one participant on the TAG except when having more than one participant
          is caused by a change of affiliation of an existing participant. At the completion of the next regularly scheduled
          election for the TAG, the Member organization <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have returned to having at most
          one participant.</li>
        <li>A Member organization is permitted at most one participant on the AB.</li>
        <li>An individual <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> participate on both the TAG and the AB.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>If, for whatever reason, these constraints are not satisfied (e.g., because an AB participant changes jobs),
        one participant <em class="rfc2119">must</em> cease AB participation until the situation has been resolved. If after
        <span class="time-interval">30 days</span> the situation has not been resolved, the Chair will declare one participant's
        seat to be vacant. When more than one individual is involved, the
        <a href="#random">verifiable random selection procedure</a> described below will be used to choose one person for
        continued participation.</p>

      <h4 id="AB-TAG-elections">2.5.2 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Elections</h4>

      <p>The Advisory Board and a portion of the Technical Architecture Group are elected by the Advisory Committee, using a
        Single Transferable Vote system. An election begins when the Team sends a Call for Nominations to the Advisory Committee.
        Any Call for Nominations specifies the number of available seats, the deadline for nominations, details about the
        specific vote tabulation system selected by the Team for the election, and operational information such as how to
        nominate a candidate. The Team 
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> modify the  tabulation system after the Call for Nominations but
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> stabilize it no later than the Call for Votes. The Director <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        announce appointments no later than the start of a nomination period as part of the Call for Nominations.</p>

      <p>Each Member (or group of <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>) <em class="rfc2119">may</em> nominate one 
        individual. A nomination <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be made with the consent of the nominee. In order for
        an individual to be nominated as a Member representative, the individual <em class="rfc2119">must</em> qualify for 
        <a href="#member-rep">Member representation</a> and the Member's Advisory Committee representative
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include in the nomination the (same)
        <a href="#member-rep-info">information required for a Member representative in a Working Group</a>. In order for an
        individual to be nominated as an Invited Expert, the individual <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide the (same)
        <a href="#inv-expert-info">information required for an Invited Expert in a Working Group</a> and the nominating
        Advisory Committee representative <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include that information in the nomination. 
        In order for an individual to be nominated as a Team representative, the nominating Advisory Committee representative
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> first secure approval from Team management. A nominee is
        <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> to be an employee of a Member organization, and <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be a
        <a href="#fellows">W3C Fellow</a>. Each nomination <em class="rfc2119">should</em> include a few informative paragraphs
        about the nominee.</p>

      <p>If, after the deadline for nominations, the number of nominees is:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>Equal to the number of available seats, those nominees are thereby elected. This situation constitutes a tie for the
          purposes of assigning <a href="#short-term">short terms</a>.</li>
        <li>Less than the number of available seats, Calls for Nominations are issued until a sufficient number of people
          have been nominated. Those already nominated do not need to be renominated after a renewed call.</li>
        <li>Greater than the number of available seats, the Team issues a Call for Votes that includes the names of
          all candidates, the number of available seats, the deadline for votes, details about the vote tabulation system
          selected by the Team for the election, and operational information.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>When there is a vote, each Member (or group of <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>)
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> submit one ballot that ranks candidates in the Member's preferred order. Once the deadline
        for votes has passed, the Team announces the results to the Advisory Committee. In case of a tie the
        <a href="#random">verifiable random selection procedure</a> described below will be used to fill the available seats.</p>

      <p id="short-term">The shortest term is assigned to the elected candidate ranked lowest by the tabulation of votes, the
        next shortest term to the next-lowest ranked elected candidate, and so on. In the case of a tie among those eligible for
        a short term, the <a href="#random">verifiable random selection procedure</a> described below will be used to assign the
        short term.</p>

      <p>Refer to <a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/10/election-howto">How to Organize an Advisory Board or TAG election</a>
       [<a href="#ref-election-howto">MEM15</a>] for more details.</p>

      <h5 id="random">2.5.2.1 Verifiable Random Selection Procedure</h5>

      <p>When it is necessary to use a verifiable random selection process (e.g., in an AB or TAG election, to "draw straws"
        in case of a tie or to fill a short term), W3C uses the random and verifiable procedure defined in
        <a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2777.txt">RFC 2777</a> [<a href="#ref-RFC2777">RFC2777</a>]. The procedure orders
        an input list of names (listed in alphabetical order by family name unless otherwise specified) into a
        "result order."</p>

      <p>W3C applies this procedure as follows:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>When N people have tied for M (less than N) seats. In this case, only the names of the N individuals who tied
          are provided as input to the procedure. The M seats are assigned in result order.</li>
        <li>After all elected individuals have been identified, when N people are eligible for M (less than N) short terms.
          In this case, only the names of those N individuals are provided as input to the procedure. The short terms are
          assigned in result order.</li>
      </ol>

      <h4 id="AB-TAG-vacated">2.5.3 Advisory Board and Technical Architecture Group Vacated Seats</h4>

      <p>An Advisory Board or TAG participant's seat is vacated when either of the following occurs:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>the participant <a href="#resignation">resigns</a>, or</li>
        <li>the Chair asks the participant to <a href="#resignation">resign</a>.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>When an Advisory Board or TAG participant changes affiliations, as long as
        <a href="#AB-TAG-constraints">Advisory Board and TAG participation constraints</a> are respected, the individual
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> continue to participate until the next regularly scheduled election for that group.
        Otherwise, the seat is vacated.</p>

      <p>Vacated seats are filled according to this schedule:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>When an appointed TAG seat is vacated, the Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> re-appoint someone immediately,
          but no later than the next regularly scheduled election.</li>
        <li>When an elected seat on either the AB or TAG is vacated, the seat is filled at the next regularly scheduled election
          for the group unless the group Chair requests that W3C hold an election before then (for instance,
          due to the group's workload). The group Chair <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> request an exceptional election
          if the next regularly scheduled election is fewer than three months away.</li>
      </ul>

      <h2 id="Policies">3 General Policies for W3C Groups</h2>

      <p>This section describes general policies for W3C groups regarding participation, meeting requirements, and
        decision-making. These policies apply to <span id="participant">participants</span> in the following groups:
        <a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a>, <a href="#ABParticipation">Advisory Board</a>,
        <a href="#tag-participation">TAG</a>,
        <a href="#wgparticipant">Working Groups</a>, and <a href="#igparticipant">Interest Groups</a>.</p>

      <h3 id="ParticipationCriteria">3.1 Individual Participation Criteria</h3>

      <p>There are three qualities an individual is expected to demonstrate in order to participate in W3C:</p>
      <ol>
        <li>Technical competence in one's role</li>
        <li>The ability to act fairly</li>
        <li>Social competence in one's role</li>
      </ol>
      <p>Advisory Committee representatives who nominate individuals from their organization for participation in W3C activities
        are responsible for assessing and attesting to the qualities of those nominees.</p>
      <p>See also the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/">W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct</a> 
       [<a href="#ref-cepc">PUB38</a>] and the participation requirements described in
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Disclosure">section 6</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="coi">3.1.1 Conflict of Interest Policy</h4>

      <p>Individuals participating materially in W3C work <em class="rfc2119">must</em> disclose significant relationships when
       those relationships might reasonably be perceived as creating a conflict of interest with the individual's role at W3C.
       These disclosures <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be kept up-to-date as the individual's affiliations change and
       W3C membership evolves (since, for example, the individual might have a relationship with an organization that joins or
       leaves W3C). Each section in this document that describes a W3C group provides more detail about the disclosure mechanisms
       for that group.</p>
      <p>The ability of an individual to fulfill a role within a group without risking a conflict of interest depends on
        the individual's affiliations. When these affiliations change, the individual's assignment to the role
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be evaluated. The role <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be reassigned according to the
        appropriate process. For instance, the Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> appoint a new group Chair when the
        current Chair changes affiliations (e.g., if there is a risk of conflict of interest, or if there is risk that the
        Chair's new employer will be over-represented within a W3C activity).</p>
      <p>The following are some scenarios where disclosure is appropriate:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>Paid consulting for an organization whose activity is relevant to W3C, or any consulting compensated with
          equity (shares of stock, stock options, or other forms of corporate equity).</li>
        <li>A decision-making role/responsibility (such as participating on the Board) in other organizations relevant to W3C.</li>
        <li>A position on a publicly visible advisory body, even if no decision making authority is involved.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>Individuals seeking assistance on these matters <em class="rfc2119">should</em> contact the Team.</p>
      <p>Team members are subject to the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/2000/09/06-conflictpolicy">W3C Team conflict of interest policy</a>
        [<a href="#ref-coi">PUB23</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="member-rep">3.1.2 Individuals Representing a Member Organization</h4>

      <p>Generally, individuals representing a Member in an official capacity within W3C are employees of the
        Member organization.
        However, an Advisory Committee representative <em class="rfc2119">may</em> designate a non-employee to represent the
        Member. Non-employee Member representatives <em class="rfc2119">must</em> disclose relevant affiliations to the Team and
        to any group in which the individual participates.</p>

      <p>In exceptional circumstances (e.g., situations that might jeopardize the progress of a group or create a
        <a href="#coi">conflict of interest</a>), the <a href="#def-Director">Director</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
        decline to allow an individual designated by an Advisory Committee representative to participate in a group.</p>

      <p>A group charter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> limit the number of individuals representing a W3C Member (or group of
        <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>).</p>

      <h3 id="GeneralMeetings">3.2 Meetings</h3>

      <p>W3C groups (including the <a href="#ACMeetings">Advisory Committee</a>, <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a>,
        <a href="#TAG">TAG</a>, and <a href="#GroupsWG">Working Groups</a>) <em class="rfc2119">should</em> observe the
        meeting requirements in this section.</p>

      <p>W3C distinguishes two types of meetings:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>A <dfn id="ftf-meeting">face-to-face meeting</dfn> is one where most of the attendees are expected to
          participate in the same physical location.</li>
        <li>A <dfn id="distributed-meeting">distributed meeting</dfn> is one where most of the attendees are expected
          to participate from remote locations (e.g., by telephone, video conferencing, or
          <abbr title="Internet Relay Chat">IRC</abbr>).</li>
      </ol>

      <p>A Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> invite an individual with a particular expertise to attend a meeting on
        an exceptional basis. This person is a meeting guest, not a group <a href="#participant">participant</a>. Meeting guests
        do not have <a href="#Votes">voting rights</a>. It is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that all meeting guests
        respect the chartered <a href="#confidentiality-levels">level of confidentiality</a> and other group requirements.</p>

      <p>Meeting announcements <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be sent to all appropriate group mailing lists, i.e., those most
        relevant to the anticipated meeting participants.</p>

      <p>The following table lists requirements for organizing a meeting:</p>

      <table border="1">
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <th><br>
            </th>
            <th>Face-to-face meetings</th>
            <th>Distributed meetings</th>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th>Meeting announcement (before)</th>
            <td><span class="time-interval">eight weeks<sup>*</sup></span></td>
            <td><span class="time-interval">one week<sup>*</sup></span></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th>Agenda available (before)</th>
            <td><span class="time-interval">two weeks</span></td>
            <td><span class="time-interval">24 hours</span> (or longer if a meeting is scheduled after a weekend or holiday)</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th>Participation confirmed (before)</th>
            <td><span class="time-interval">three days</span></td>
            <td><span class="time-interval">24 hours</span></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th>Action items available (after)</th>
            <td><span class="time-interval">three days</span></td>
            <td><span class="time-interval">24 hours</span></td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <th>Minutes available (after)</th>
            <td><span class="time-interval">two weeks</span></td>
            <td><span class="time-interval">48 hours</span></td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>

      <p><sup>*</sup> To allow proper planning (e.g., travel arrangements), the Chair is responsible for giving sufficient
        advance notice about the date and location of a meeting. Shorter notice for a meeting is allowed provided that there
        are no objections from group participants.</p>

      <h3 id="Consensus">3.3 Consensus</h3>

      <p>Consensus is a core value of W3C. To promote consensus, the W3C process requires Chairs to ensure that groups consider
        all legitimate views and objections, and endeavor to resolve them, whether these views and objections are expressed by
        the active participants of the group or by others (e.g., another W3C group, a group in another organization, or the
        general public). Decisions <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be made during meetings (<a href="#ftf-meeting">face-to-face</a>
        or <a href="#distributed-meeting">distributed</a>) as well as through email. <strong>Note:</strong> The Director, CEO,
        and COO have the role of assessing consensus within the Advisory Committee.</p>

      <p>The following terms are used in this document to describe the level of support for a decision among a set of eligible
        individuals:</p>
      <ol>
        <li><dfn id="def-Consensus">Consensus</dfn>: A substantial number of individuals in the set support the decision and
          nobody in the set registers a <a href="#FormalObjection">Formal Objection</a>. Individuals in the set
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> abstain.
          Abstention is either an explicit expression of no opinion or silence by an individual in the set.
          <dfn id="def-Unanimity">Unanimity</dfn> is the particular case of consensus where all individuals in the set support
          the decision (i.e., no individual in the set abstains).</li>
        <li><dfn id="def-Dissent">Dissent</dfn>: At least one individual in the set registers a
          <a href="#FormalObjection">Formal Objection</a>.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>By default, the set of individuals eligible to participate in a decision is the set of group participants. The
        Process Document does not require a quorum for decisions (i.e., the minimal number of eligible participants required
        to be present before the Chair can call a question). A charter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> include a
        quorum requirement for consensus decisions.</p>

      <p>Where unanimity is not possible, a group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> strive to make consensus decisions where
        there is significant support and few abstentions. The Process Document does not require a particular percentage of
        eligible participants to agree to a motion in order for a decision to be made. To avoid decisions where there is 
        widespread apathy, (i.e., little support and many abstentions), groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> set
        minimum thresholds of active support before a decision can be recorded. The appropriate percentage
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> vary depending on the size of the group and the nature of the decision. A charter
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> include threshold requirements for consensus decisions. For instance, a charter
        might require a supermajority of eligible participants (i.e., some established percentage above 50%) to support
        certain types of consensus decisions.</p>

      <h4 id="managing-dissent">3.3.1 Managing Dissent</h4>

      <p>In some cases, even after careful consideration of all points of view, a group might find itself unable to reach
        consensus. The Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> record a decision where there is dissent (i.e., there is at least one
        <a href="#FormalObjection">Formal Objection</a>) so that the group can make progress (for example, to produce a
        deliverable in a timely manner). Dissenters cannot stop a group's work simply by saying that they cannot live with a
        decision. When the Chair believes that the Group has duly considered the legitimate concerns of dissenters as far as is
        possible and reasonable, the group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> move on.</p>
      <p>Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> favor proposals that create the weakest objections. This is preferred over
        proposals that are supported by a large majority but that cause strong objections from a few people. As part of making
        a decision where there is dissent, the Chair is expected to be aware of which participants work for the same (or
        <a href="#MemberRelated">related</a>) Member organizations and weigh their input accordingly.</p>

      <h4 id="WGArchiveMinorityViews">3.3.2 Recording and Reporting Formal Objections</h4>

      <p>In the W3C process, an individual <em class="rfc2119">may</em> register a Formal Objection to a decision. A
        <dfn id="FormalObjection">Formal Objection</dfn> to a group decision is one that the reviewer requests that the
        Director consider as part of evaluating the related decision (e.g., in response to a
        <a href="#rec-advance">request to advance</a> a technical report). <strong>Note:</strong> In this document, the
        term "Formal Objection" is used to emphasize this process implication: Formal Objections receive Director consideration.
        The word "objection" used alone has ordinary English connotations.</p>
      <p>An individual who registers a Formal Objection <em class="rfc2119">should</em> cite technical arguments and propose
        changes that would remove the Formal Objection; these proposals <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be vague or incomplete.
        Formal Objections that do not provide substantive arguments or rationale are unlikely to receive serious consideration
        by the Director.</p>
      <p>A record of each Formal Objection <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be
        <a href="#confidentiality-change">publicly available</a>. A Call for Review (of a document) to the Advisory Committee
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify any Formal Objections.</p>

      <h4 id="formal-address">3.3.3 Formally Addressing an Issue</h4>

      <p>In the context of this document, a group has formally addressed an issue when it has sent a public, substantive response
        to the reviewer who raised the issue. A substantive response is expected to include rationale for decisions (e.g., a
        technical explanation, a pointer to charter scope, or a pointer to a requirements document). The adequacy of a response
        is measured against what a W3C reviewer would generally consider to be technically sound. If a group believes that a
        reviewer's comments result from a misunderstanding, the group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> seek clarification
        before reaching a decision.</p>
      <p>As a courtesy, both Chairs and reviewers <em class="rfc2119">should</em> set expectations for the schedule of
        responses and acknowledgments. The group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> reply to a reviewer's initial comments in a
        timely manner. The group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> set a time limit for acknowledgment by a reviewer of the
        group's substantive response; a reviewer cannot block a group's progress. It is common for a reviewer to require a week
        or more to acknowledge and comment on a substantive response. The group's responsibility to respond to reviewers does
        not end once a reasonable amount of time has elapsed. However, reviewers <em class="rfc2119">should</em> realize that
        their comments will carry less weight if not sent to the group in a timely manner.</p>
      <p>Substantive responses <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be recorded. The group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> maintain
        an accurate summary of all substantive issues and responses to them (e.g., in the form of an issues list with links to
        mailing list archives).</p>

      <h4 id="WGChairReopen">3.3.4 Reopening a Decision When Presented With New Information</h4>

      <p>The Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> reopen a decision when presented with new information, including:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>additional technical information,</li>
        <li>comments by email from participants who were unable to attend a scheduled meeting,</li>
        <li>comments by email from meeting attendees who chose not to speak out during a meeting (e.g., so they could confer
          later with colleagues or for cultural reasons).</li>
      </ul>
      <p>The Chair <em class="rfc2119">should</em> record that a decision has been reopened, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
        do so upon request from a group participant.</p>

      <h3 id="Votes">3.4 Votes</h3>

      <p>A group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> only conduct a vote to resolve a <em>substantive issue</em> after the Chair has
        determined that all available means of <a href="#Consensus">reaching consensus</a> through technical discussion and
        compromise have failed, and that a vote is necessary to break a deadlock. In this case the Chair
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> record (e.g., in the minutes of the meeting or in an archived email message):</p>
      <ul>
        <li>an explanation of the issue being voted on;</li>
        <li>the decision to conduct a vote (e.g., a simple majority vote) to resolve the issue;</li>
        <li>the outcome of the vote;</li>
        <li>any Formal Objections.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>In order to vote to resolve a substantive issue, an individual <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be a group
        <a href="#participant">participant</a>. Each organization represented in the group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have
        at most one vote, even when the organization is represented by several participants in the group (including
        Invited Experts). For the purposes of voting:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>A Member or group of <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a> is considered a single organization.</li>
        <li>The <a href="#Team">Team</a> is considered an organization.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>Unless the charter states otherwise, <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> vote.</p>
      <p>If a participant is unable to attend a vote, that individual <em class="rfc2119">may</em> authorize anyone at the meeting
        to act as a <dfn id="proxy">proxy</dfn>. The absent participant <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform the Chair in writing
        who is acting as proxy, with written instructions on the use of the proxy. For a Working Group or Interest Group, see the
        related requirements regarding an individual who attends a meeting as a <a href="#mtg-substitute">substitute</a>
        for a participant.</p>

      <p>A group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> vote for other purposes than to resolve a substantive issue. For instance, the
       Chair often conducts a "straw poll" vote as a means of determining whether there is consensus about a potential decision.</p>
      <p>A group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also vote to make a process decision. For example, it is appropriate to decide by
        simple majority whether to hold a meeting in San Francisco or San Jose (there's not much difference geographically).
        When simple majority votes are used to decide minor issues, the minority are <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> to
        state the reasons for their dissent, and the group is <em class="rfc2119">not required</em> to record individual votes.</p>
      <p>A group charter <em class="rfc2119">should</em> include formal voting procedures (e.g., quorum or threshold requirements)
        for making decisions about substantive issues.</p>

      <p>Procedures for <a href="#ACVotes">Advisory Committee votes</a> are described separately.</p>

      <h3 id="WGAppeals">3.5 Appeal of a Chair's Decision</h3>

      <p>Groups resolve issues through dialog. Individuals who disagree strongly with a decision <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        register with the Chair any <a href="#FormalObjection">Formal Objections</a> (e.g., to a decision made as the result of a
        <a href="#Votes">vote</a>).</p>

      <p>When group participants believe that their concerns are not being duly considered by the group, they
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> ask the <a href="#def-Director">Director</a> (for representatives of a Member organization,
        via their Advisory Committee representative) to confirm or deny the decision. This is a <dfn>Group Decision Appeal</dfn>.
        The participants <em class="rfc2119">should</em> also make their requests known to the
        <a href="#TeamContact">Team Contact</a>. The Team Contact <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform the Director when a group
        participant has raised concerns about due process.</p>

      <p>Any requests to the Director to confirm a decision <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include a summary of the issue
       (whether technical or procedural), decision, and rationale for the objection. All counter-arguments, rationales,
       and decisions <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be recorded.</p>
      <p>Procedures for <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee appeals</a> are described separately.</p>

      <h3 id="resignation">3.6 Resignation from a Group</h3>
      <p>A W3C Member or Invited Expert <em class="rfc2119">may</em> resign from a group. On written notification from an Advisory
        Committee representative or Invited Expert to the team, the Member and their representatives or the Invited Expert will
        be deemed to have resigned from the relevant group. See section 4.2. of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
        for information about obligations remaining after resignation from certain groups.</p>

      <section id="chapterDissemination">
        <h2 id="dissemination">4 Dissemination Policies</h2>
        <p>The Team is responsible for managing communication within W3C and with the general public (e.g., news services,
          press releases, managing the Web site and access privileges, and managing calendars). Members
          <em class="rfc2119">should</em> solicit review by the Team prior to issuing press releases about their work within W3C.</p>
        <p>The Team makes every effort to ensure the persistence and availability of the following public information:</p>
        <ul>
          <li><a href="#Reports">W3C technical reports</a> whose publication has been approved by the Director. Per the Membership
            Agreement, W3C technical reports (and software) are available free of charge to the general public;
            (refer to the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">W3C Document License</a>
            [<a href="#ref-doc-license">PUB18</a>]).</li>
          <li>A <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission">mission statement</a> [<a href="#ref-mission">PUB15</a>]
            that explains the
            purpose and mission of W3C, the key benefits for Members, and the organizational structure of W3C.</li>
          <li>Legal documents, including the
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Agreement/Member-Agreement">Membership Agreement</a>
            [<a href="#ref-member-agreement">PUB6</a>]) and documentation of any legal commitments W3C has with other entities.</li>
          <li>The Process Document.</li>
          <li>Public results of W3C activities and <a href="#GAEvents">Workshops</a>.</li>
        </ul>
        <p>To keep the Members abreast of W3C meetings, Workshops, and review deadlines, the Team provides them with a regular
          (e.g., weekly) news service and maintains a <a href="https://www.w3.org/participate/eventscal">calendar</a>
          [<a href="#ref-calendar">PUB36</a>] of official W3C events. Members are encouraged to send schedule and event information
          to the Team for inclusion on this calendar.</p>

        <h3 id"confidentiality-levels"="">4.1 Confidentiality Levels</h3>

        <p>There are three principal levels of access to W3C information (on the W3C Web site, in W3C meetings, etc.): public,
          Member-only, and Team-only.</p>
        <p>While much information made available by W3C is public, <dfn id="Member-only">"Member-only" information</dfn>
          is available to authorized parties only, including representatives of Member organizations,
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a>, the Advisory Board, the TAG, and the Team. For example, the
          <a href="#WGCharter">charter</a> of some Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">may</em> specify a
          Member-only confidentiality level for group proceedings.</p>
        <p id="Team-only">"Team-only" information is available to the Team and other authorized parties.</p>
        <p>Those authorized to access Member-only and Team-only information:</p>
        <ul>
          <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> treat the information as confidential within W3C,</li>
          <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> use reasonable efforts to maintain the proper level confidentiality, and</li>
          <li><em class="rfc2119">must not</em> release this information to the general public or press.</li>
        </ul>
        <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide mechanisms to protect the confidentiality of Member-only information
          and ensure that authorized parties have proper access to this information. Documents <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
          clearly indicate whether they require Member-only confidentiality. Individuals uncertain of the confidentiality level
          of a piece of information <em class="rfc2119">should</em> contact the Team.</p>
        <p>Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> authorize Member-only access to
          <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a> and other individuals employed by the Member who are considered
          appropriate recipients. For instance, it is the responsibility of the Advisory Committee representative and other
          employees and official representatives of the organization to ensure that Member-only news announcements are
          distributed for internal use only within their organization. Information about
          Member mailing lists is available in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Intro">New Member Orientation</a>.</p>

        <h4 id="confidentiality-change">4.1.1 Changing Confidentiality Level</h4>

        <p>As a benefit of membership, W3C provides some Team-only and Member-only channels for certain types of communication.
          For example, Advisory Committee representatives can send <a href="#ACReview">reviews</a> to a Team-only channel.
          However, for W3C processes with a significant public component, such as the technical report development process, it
          is also important for information that affects decision-making to be publicly available. The Team
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> need to communicate Team-only information to a Working Group or the public. Similarly,
          a Working Group whose proceedings are Member-only <em class="rfc2119">must</em> make
          public information pertinent to the technical report development process.</p>
        <p>This document clearly indicates which information <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be available to Members or the public,
          even though that information was initially communicated on Team-only or Member-only channels. Only the Team and
          parties authorized by the Team change the level of confidentiality of this information. When doing so:</p>
        <ol>
          <li>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> use a version of the information that was expressly provided by the author
            for the new confidentiality level. In Calls for Review and other similar messages, the Team
            <em class="rfc2119">should</em> remind recipients to provide such alternatives.</li>
          <li>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> attribute the version for the new confidentiality level to the
            author without the author's consent.</li>
          <li>If the author has not conveyed to the Team a version that is suitable for another confidentiality level, the Team
            <em class="rfc2119">may</em> make available a version that reasonably communicates what is required, while
            respecting the original level of confidentiality, and without attribution to the original author.</li>
        </ol>
      </section>

      <section id="ChapterGroups">

        <h2 id="GAGeneral">5 Working Groups and Interest Groups</h2>

        <p id="GAGroups">This document defines two types of groups:</p>
        <ol>
          <li><a href="#GroupsWG">Working Groups.</a> Working Groups typically produce deliverables (e.g.,
            <a href="#rec-advance">Recommendation Track technical reports</a>, software, test suites, and reviews of the
            deliverables of other groups). There are additional participation requirements described in the
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
            [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</li>
          <li><a href="#GroupsIG">Interest Groups.</a> The primary goal of an Interest Group is to bring together people who
            wish to evaluate potential Web technologies and policies. An Interest Group is a forum for the exchange of ideas.</li>
        </ol>
        <p>Interest Groups do not publish <a href="#RecsW3C">Recommendation Track technical reports</a>; see information about
          <a href="#WGNote">maturity levels for Interest Groups</a>.</p>

        <h3 id="ReqsAllGroups">5.1 Requirements for All Working and Interest Groups</h3>

        <p>Each group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have a charter. Requirements for the charter depend on the group type.
          All group charters <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be public (even if other proceedings of the group are
          <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a>).</p>
        <p>Each group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have a <dfn id="GeneralChairs">Chair</dfn> (or co-Chairs) to coordinate
          the group's tasks. The Director appoints (and re-appoints) Chairs for all groups. The Chair is a
          <a href="#member-rep">Member representative</a>, a <a href="#Team">Team representative</a>, or an
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Expert</a> (invited by the Director). The requirements of this document that
          apply to those types of participants apply to Chairs as well. The
          <a href="/Guide/chair-roles">role of the Chair</a> is described in the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/">Art of Consensus</a> [<a href="#ref-guide">PUB37</a>].</p>
        <p>Each group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have a <dfn id="TeamContact">Team Contact</dfn>, who acts as the interface
          between the Chair, group participants, and the rest of the Team. The 
          <a href="/Guide/staff-contact">role of the Team Contact</a> is described in the Member guide. The Chair and the
          Team Contact of a group <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> be the same individual.</p>
        <p>Each group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> have an archived mailing list for formal group communication (e.g., for
          meeting announcements and minutes, documentation of decisions, and <a href="#FormalObjection">Formal Objections</a>
          to decisions). It is the responsibility of the Chair and Team Contact to ensure that new participants are subscribed
          to all relevant mailing lists. Refer to the list of
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/">group mailing lists</a> [<a href="#ref-mailing-lists">MEM2</a>].</p>
        <p>A Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> form task forces (composed of group participants) to carry out assignments for
          the group. The scope of these assignments <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> exceed the scope of the group's charter.
          A group <em class="rfc2119">should</em> document the process it uses to create task forces (e.g., each task force
          might have an informal "charter"). Task forces do not publish <a href="#Reports">technical reports</a>; the 
          Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> choose to publish their results as part of a technical report.</p>

        <h3>5.2 <dfn id="GroupsWG">Working Groups</dfn> and <dfn id="GroupsIG">Interest Groups</dfn></h3>

        <p>Although Working Groups and Interest Groups have different purposes, they share some characteristics, and so are
          defined together in the following sections.</p>

        <h4>5.2.1 <dfn id="group-participation">Working Group and Interest Group Participation Requirements</dfn></h4>

        <p>There are three types of individual <dfn id="wgparticipant">participants in a Working Group</dfn>:
          <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a>, <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a>,
          and <a href="#Team">Team representatives</a> (including the <a href="#TeamContact">Team Contact</a>).</p>
        <p>There are four types of individual <dfn id="igparticipant">participants in an Interest Group</dfn>: the same three
          types as for Working Groups plus, for an Interest Group where the only
          <a href="#ig-mail-only">participation requirement is mailing list subscription</a>,
          <dfn id="public-participant-ig">public participants</dfn>.</p>
        <p>Except where noted in this document or in a group charter, all participants share the same rights and responsibilities
          in a group; see also the <a href="#ParticipationCriteria">individual participation criteria</a>.</p>
        <p>A participant <em class="rfc2119">must</em> represent at most one organization in a Working Group or Interest Group.</p>
        <p>An individual <em class="rfc2119">may</em> become a Working or Interest Group participant at any time during the group's
          existence. See also relevant requirements in
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-join">section 4.3</a> of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>
        <p>On an exceptional basis, a Working or Interest Group participant <em class="rfc2119">may</em> designate a
          <dfn id="mtg-substitute">substitute</dfn> to attend a <a href="#GeneralMeetings">meeting</a> and
          <em class="rfc2119">should</em> inform the Chair. The substitute <em class="rfc2119">may</em> act on behalf of the
          participant, including for <a href="#Votes">votes</a>. For the substitute to vote, the participant
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform the Chair in writing in advance. As a courtesy to the group, if the substitute
          is not well-versed in the group's discussions, the regular participant <em class="rfc2119">should</em> authorize
          another participant to act as <a href="#proxy">proxy</a> for votes.</p>
        <p>To allow rapid progress, Working Groups are intended to be small (typically fewer than 15 people) and composed of
          experts in the area defined by the charter. In principle, Interest Groups have no limit on the number of participants.
          When a Working Group grows too large to be effective, W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> split it into an Interest Group
          (a discussion forum) and a much smaller Working Group (a core group of highly dedicated participants).</p>
        <p>See also the licensing obligations on Working Group participants in
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Obligations">section 3</a> of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>],
          and the patent claim exclusion process of
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a>.</p>

        <h5>5.2.1.1 <dfn id="member-rep-wg">Member Representative</dfn> in a Working Group</h5>

        <p>An individual is a Member representative in a Working Group if all of the following conditions are satisfied:</p>
        <ul>
          <li>the Advisory Committee representative of the Member in question has designated the individual as a
            Working Group participant, and</li>
          <li>the individual qualifies for <a href="#member-rep">Member representation</a>.</li>
        </ul>
        <p><dfn id="member-rep-info">To designate an individual as a Member representative in a Working Group</dfn>, an
          Advisory Committee representative <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide the Chair and Team Contact with all of
          the following information, in addition to any other information required by the <a href="#cfp">Call for Participation</a>
          and charter (including the participation requirements of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]):</p>
        <ol>
          <li>The name of the W3C Member the individual represents and whether the individual is an employee of that
            Member organization;</li>
          <li>A statement that the individual accepts the participation terms set forth in the charter (with an indication
            of charter date or version);</li>
          <li>A statement that the Member will provide the necessary financial support for participation (e.g., for travel,
            telephone calls, and conferences).</li>
        </ol>
        <p>A Member participates in a Working Group from the moment the first Member representative joins the group until
          either of the following occurs:</p>
        <ul>
          <li>the group closes, or</li>
          <li>the Member <a href="#resignation">resigns</a> from the Working Group; this is done through the
            Member's Advisory Committee representative.</li>
        </ul>

        <h5>5.2.1.2 <dfn id="member-rep-ig">Member Representative</dfn> in an Interest Group</h5>

        <p>When the participation requirements exceed <a href="#ig-mail-only">Interest Group mailing list subscription</a>,
          an individual is a Member representative in an Interest Group if all of the following conditions are satisfied:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>the Advisory Committee representative of the Member in question has designated the individual as an
            Interest Group participant, and</li>
          <li>the individual qualifies for <a href="#member-rep">Member representation</a>.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>To designate an individual as a Member representative in an Interest Group, the Advisory Committee representative
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> follow the instructions in the <a href="#cfp">Call for Participation</a> and charter.</p>

        <p>Member participation in an Interest Group ceases under the same conditions as for a Working Group.</p>

        <h5>5.2.1.3 <dfn id="invited-expert-wg">Invited Expert in a Working Group</dfn></h5>

        <p>The Chair <em class="rfc2119">may</em> invite an individual with a particular expertise to participate in a
          Working Group. This individual <em class="rfc2119">may</em> represent an organization in the group 
          (e.g., if acting as a liaison with another organization).</p>

        <p>An individual is an Invited Expert in a Working Group if all of the following conditions are satisfied:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>the Chair has designated the individual as a group participant,</li>
          <li>the Team Contact has agreed with the Chair's choice, and</li>
          <li>the individual has provided the <a href="#inv-expert-info">information required of an Invited Expert</a> to
            the Chair and Team Contact.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>To designate an individual as an Invited Expert in a Working Group, the Chair <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
          inform the Team Contact and provide rationale for the choice. When the Chair and the Team Contact disagree about
          a designation, the <a href="#def-Director">Director</a> determines whether the individual will be invited to
          participate in the Working Group.</p>

        <p>To <dfn id="inv-expert-info">participate in a Working Group as an Invited Expert</dfn>, an individual
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em>:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>identify the organization, if any, the individual represents as a participant in this group,</li>
          <li>agree to the terms of the
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/collaborators-agreement">invited expert and collaborators agreement</a>
            [<a href="#ref-invited-expert">PUB17</a>],</li>
          <li>accept the participation terms set forth in the charter (including the participation requirements of
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Obligations">section 3</a> (especially 3.4) and
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Disclosure">section 6</a> (especially 6.10) of the
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]),
            indicating a specific charter date or version,</li>
          <li>disclose whether the individual is an employee of a W3C Member; see the
            <a href="#coi">conflict of interest policy</a>,</li>
          <li>provide a statement of who will provide the necessary financial support for the individual's participation
            (e.g., for travel, telephone calls, and conferences), and</li>
          <li>if the individual's employer (including a self-employed individual) or the organization the individual represents
            is not a W3C Member, indicate whether that organization intends to join W3C. If the organization does not intend to
            join W3C, indicate reasons the individual is aware of for this choice.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>The Chair <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> designate as an Invited Expert in a Working Group an individual
          who is an employee of a W3C Member. The Chair <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> use Invited Expert status to circumvent
          participation limits imposed by the <a href="#WGCharter">charter</a>.</p>
        <p>An Invited Expert participates in a Working Group from the moment the individual joins the group until any of
          the following occurs:</p>
        <ul>
          <li>the group closes, or</li>
          <li>the Chair or Director withdraws the invitation to participate, or</li>
          <li>the individual <a href="#resignation">resigns</a>.</li>
        </ul>

        <h5>5.2.1.4 <dfn id="invited-expert-ig">Invited Expert in an Interest Group</dfn></h5>

        <p>When the participation requirements exceed <a href="#ig-mail-only">Interest Group mailing list subscription</a>, the
          participation requirements for an Invited Expert in an Interest Group are the same as those for an
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Expert in a Working Group</a>.</p>

        <h5>5.2.1.5 <dfn id="team-rep-wg">Team Representative in a Working Group</dfn></h5>

        <p>An individual is a Team representative in a Working Group when so designated by W3C management.</p>

        <p>A Team representative participates in a Working Group from the moment the individual joins the group until any of
          the following occurs:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>the group closes, or</li>
          <li>W3C management changes Team representation by sending email to the Chair, cc'ing the group mailing list.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>The Team participates in a Working Group from the moment the Director announces the creation of the group until
          the group closes.</p>

        <h5>5.2.1.6 <dfn id="team-rep-ig">Team Representative in an Interest Group</dfn></h5>

        <p>When the participation requirements exceed <a href="#ig-mail-only">Interest Group mailing list subscription</a>,
          an individual is a Team representative in an Interest Group when so designated by W3C management.</p>

        <h4>5.2.2 <dfn id="WGCharterDevelopment">Working Group and Interest Group Charter Development</dfn></h4>

        <p>W3C creates a charter based on interest from the Members and Team. The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> notify
          the Advisory Committee when a charter for a new Working Group or Interest Group is in development. This is intended
          to raise awareness, even if no formal proposal is yet available. Advisory Committee representatives
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> provide feedback on the
          <a href="#ACCommunication">Advisory Committee discussion list</a>.</p>

        <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> begin work on a Working Group or Interest Group charter at any time.</p>

        <h4>5.2.3 <dfn id="CharterReview">Advisory Committee Review of a Working Group or Interest Group Charter</dfn></h4>

        <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> solicit <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a> of every new or
          substantively modified Working Group or Interest Group charter. The Director is <em class="rfc2119">not required</em>
          to solicit Advisory Committee review prior to a charter extension or for minor changes. The review period
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be at least four weeks.</p>

        <p>The Director's Call for Review of a substantively modified charter <em class="rfc2119">must</em> highlight
          important changes (e.g., regarding deliverables or resource allocation) and include rationale for the changes.</p>

        <h4>5.2.4 <dfn id="cfp">Call for Participation in a Working Group or Interest Group</dfn></h4>

        <p>After Advisory Committee review of a Working Group or Interest Group charter, the Director
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> issue a Call for Participation to the Advisory Committee. Charters
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be amended based on review comments before the Director issues a
          Call for Participation. </p>

        <p>For a new group, this announcement officially creates the group. The announcement <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
          include a reference to the <a href="#WGCharter">charter</a>, the name(s) of the group's
          <a href="#GeneralChairs">Chair(s)</a>, and the name(s) of the <a href="#TeamContact">Team Contact(s)</a>.</p>

        <p>After a Call for Participation, any <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a> and
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a> <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be designated (or re-designated).</p>

        <p>Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> against a Director's decision to create or substantially modify a
          Working Group or Interest Group charter.</p>

        <h4>5.2.5 <dfn id="charter-extension">Working Group and Interest Group Charter Extension</dfn></h4>

        <p>To extend a Working Group or Interest Group charter with no other substantive modifications, the Director announces
          the extension to the Advisory Committee. The announcement <em class="rfc2119">must</em> indicate the new duration.
          The announcement <em class="rfc2119">must</em> also include rationale for the extension, a reference to the
          <a href="#WGCharter">charter</a>, the name(s) of the group's <a href="#GeneralChairs">Chair(s)</a>,
          the name of the <a href="#TeamContact">Team Contact</a>, and instructions for joining the group.</p>

        <p>After a charter extension, Advisory Committee representatives and the Chair are <em class="rfc2119">not required</em>
          to re-designate <a href="#member-rep">Member representatives</a> and
          <a href="#invited-expert-wg">Invited Experts</a>.</p>

        <p>Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> against a Director's decision regarding the extension of a
          Working Group or Interest Group charter.</p>

        <h4>5.2.6 <dfn id="WGCharter">Working Group and Interest Group Charters</dfn></h4>

        <p>A Working Group or Interest Group charter <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include all of the following information.</p>

        <ul>
          <li>The group's mission (e.g., develop a technology or process, review the work of other groups);</li>
          <li>The scope of the group's work and criteria for success;</li>
          <li>The duration of the group (typically from six months to two years);</li>
          <li>The nature of any deliverables (technical reports, reviews of the deliverables of other groups, or software);</li>
          <li>Expected milestone dates where available. <strong>Note</strong>: A charter is <em class="rfc2119">not required</em>
            to include schedules for review of other group's deliverables;</li>
          <li>The process for the group to approve the release of deliverables (including intermediate results);</li>
          <li>Any dependencies by groups within or outside of W3C on the deliverables of this group. For any dependencies,
            the charter <em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify the mechanisms for communication about the deliverables;</li>
          <li>Any dependencies of this group on other groups within or outside of W3C. Such dependencies include interactions
            with <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/Charter.html#horizontal-review">W3C Horizontal Groups</a>;</li>
          <li>The <a href="#confidentiality-levels">level of confidentiality</a> of the group's proceedings and deliverables;</li>
          <li>Meeting mechanisms and expected frequency;</li>
          <li>If known, the date of the first <a href="#ftf-meeting">face-to-face meeting</a>. The date of the first
            face-to-face meeting of a proposed group <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> be sooner than
            <span class="time-interval">eight weeks</span> after the date of the proposal.</li>
          <li>Communication mechanisms to be employed within the group, between the group and the rest of W3C, and with the
            general public;</li>
          <li>An estimate of the expected time commitment from participants;</li>
          <li>The expected time commitment and level of involvement by the Team (e.g., to track developments, write and edit
            technical reports, develop code, or organize pilot experiments).</li>
          <li>Intellectual property information. What are the intellectual property (including patents and copyright)
            considerations affecting the success of the Group? In particular, is there any reason to believe that it will be
            difficult to meet the Royalty-Free licensing goals of section 2 of the
            <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
            [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]?</li>
        </ul>

        <p>See also the charter requirements of <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Licensing">section 2</a>
         and <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Obligations">section 3</a> of the
         <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>

        <p>For every Recommendation Track deliverable that continues work on a Working Draft (WD) published under any other
          Charter (including a predecessor group of the same name), for which there is an existing Reference Draft or
          Candidate Recommendation, the description of that deliverable in the proposed charter of the adopting Working Group
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide the following information:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>The title, stable URL, and publication date of the <dfn>Adopted Working Draft</dfn> which will serve as the basis
            for work on the deliverable</li>
          <li>The title, stable URL, and publication date of the most recent Reference Draft or
            <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a> which triggered an Exclusion Opportunity per the Patent Process</li>
          <li>The stable URL of the Working Group charter under which the most recent Reference Draft or Candidate Recommendation
            was published.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>These data <em class=rfc2119>must</em> be identified in the charter with the labels "Adopted Working Draft",
          "most recent Reference Draft", "most recent Candidate Recommendation", and "Other Charter", respectively.</p>

        <p>The <dfn>Reference Draft</dfn> is the latest Working Draft published within 90 days of the 
          <a href="#first-wd">First Public Working Draft</a> or if no Public Working Draft has been published within
          90 days of the First Public Working Draft it is that First Public Working Draft. It is the specific draft against which
          exclusions are made, as per <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-exclusion-with">section 4.1</a>
          of the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
          [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>

        <p>The Adopted Working Draft and the most recent Reference Draft or <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a>
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> each be adopted in their entirety and without any modification. The proposed charter
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> state that the most recent Reference Draft or Candidate Recommendation
          is deemed to be the Reference Draft or Candidate Recommendation of the Adopted Working Draft, and the date when the
          Exclusion Opportunity that arose on publishing the First Public Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation
          began and ended. As per <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-join">section 4.3</a> of
          the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
          [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>], this potentially means that exclusions can only be made
          immediately on joining a Working Group.</p>

        <p id="ig-charter-participation">An Interest Group charter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> include provisions regarding
          participation, including specifying that the <dfn id="ig-mail-only">only requirement for participation (by anyone) in
          the Interest Group is subscription to the Interest Group mailing list</dfn>. This type of Interest Group 
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> have <a href="#public-participant-ig">public participants</a>.</p>

        <p>A charter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> include additional voting procedures, but those procedures
          <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> conflict with the <a href="#Votes">voting requirements</a> of the Process Document.</p>

        <p>A charter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> include provisions other than those required by this document. The charter
          <em class="rfc2119">should</em> highlight whether additional provisions impose constraints beyond those of the W3C
          Process Document (e.g., limits on the number of individuals in a Working Group who represent the same
          Member organization or group of <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>).</p>

        <h4>5.2.7 <dfn id="GeneralTermination">Working Group and Interest Group Closure</dfn></h4>

        <p>A Working Group or Interest Group charter specifies a duration for the group. The Director
          <em class="rfc2119">may</em> decide to close a group prior to the date specified in the charter in
          any of the following circumstances:</p>

        <ul>
          <li>There are insufficient resources to produce chartered deliverables or to maintain the group, according to
            priorities established within W3C.</li>
          <li>The group produces chartered deliverables ahead of schedule.</li>
        </ul>

        <p>The Director closes a Working Group or Interest Group by announcement to the Advisory Committee.
          Advisory Committee representatives <em class="">may</em> initiate an
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a>.</p>

        <p>Closing a Working Group has implications with respect to the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
          [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>
      </section>

      <h2 id="Reports">6 W3C Technical Report Development Process</h2>

      <p>The W3C technical report development process is the set of steps and requirements followed by W3C
        <a href="#GroupsWG">Working Groups</a> to standardize Web technology. The W3C technical report development process
        is designed to:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>support multiple specification development methodologies</li>
        <li>maximize
          <a href="#def-Consensus" rel="glossary" title="Definition of Consensus"><span class="dfn-instance">consensus</span></a>
          about the content of stable technical reports</li>
        <li>ensure high technical and editorial quality</li>
        <li>promote consistency among specifications</li>
        <li>facilitate royalty-free, interoperable implementations of Web Standards, and</li>
        <li>earn endorsement by W3C and the broader community.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>See also the licensing goals for W3C Recommendations in
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Licensing">section 2</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].
      </p>

      <h3 id="rec-advance">6.1 W3C Technical Reports</h3>

      <p>Please note that <dfn>publishing</dfn> as used in this document refers to producing a version which is listed as a
        W3C Technical Report on its <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">Technical Reports page https://www.w3.org/TR</a>.</p>

      <p>This chapter describes the formal requirements for publishing and maintaining a W3C Recommendation or Note.</p>

      <p>Typically a series of Working Drafts are published, each of which refines a document under development to complete
        the scope of work envisioned by a Working Group's charter. For a technical specification, once review suggests the
        Working Group has met their requirements satisfactorily for a new standard, there is a
        <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a> phase. This allows the entire W3C membership to provide feedback
        on whether the specification is appropriate as a W3C Recommendation, while the Working Group formally collects
        implementation experience to demonstrate that the specification works in practice. The next phase is a
        Proposed Recommendation, to finalize the review of W3C Members. If the Director determines that W3C Member review
        supports a specification becoming a standard, W3C publishes it as a Recommendation.</p>

      <p>Groups can also publish documents as W3C Notes, typically either to document information other than technical
        specifications, such as use cases motivating a specification and best practices for its use, or to clarify the
        status of work that is abandoned. </p>

      <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>

      <p>Individual Working Groups and Interest Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> adopt additional processes for
        developing publications, so long as they do not conflict with the requirements in this chapter.</p>

      <h4 id="recs-and-notes">6.1.1 Recommendations and Notes</h4>

      <p>W3C follows these steps when advancing a technical report to Recommendation.</p>

      <ol>
        <li>Publication of the <a href="#first-wd">First Public Working Draft</a>,</li>
        <li>Publication of zero or more revised <a href="#revised-wd">Public Working Drafts</a>.</li>
        <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>

<svg xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="-5 60 630 160" width="100%">
  <title>Flowchart: The basic W3C Recommendation Track</title>
  <g id="basicProcess" role="list">

    <g id="Rectrac-FPWD" role="listitem" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-fpwd-label Rectrac-fpwd-text">
      <title id="Rectrac-fpwd-label">First Public Working Draft - Exclusion Opportunity</title>
      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeWD">
        <rect fill="white" y="122" width="57" height="45"/>
        <text font-size="8"><tspan y="132" x="0">First WD</tspan>
          <tspan x="0" y="152">WG Decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="0" y="162">Director's approval</tspan></text>
        <path d="M0,140h53" fill="none" stroke="#000"></path>
        <polygon points="47,136 57,140 47,144"></polygon></a>
    </g>

    <g id="Rectrac-nodeWD" role="list" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-nodewd-label">
      <title id="Rectrac-nodewd-label">Working Draft</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsWD" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-nodewd-label">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="38" cy="140" cx="97" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" y="144" x="97" text-anchor="middle">WD</text></a>

<!-- g[role=listitem] with a link inside it -->

      <g id="Rectrac-repeatWD" role="listitem">
        <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeWD" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-repeatwd-label Rectrac-repeatwd-text">
        <title id="Rectrac-repeatwd-label">Publish a New Working Draft</title>
        <text id="Rectrac-repeatwd-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="30" y="92">WG Decision: review needed, or</tspan>
          <tspan x="40" y="100">No change for 6 months</tspan></text>
        <path d="M78,124C73,114 79,104 97,104 108,104 115,108 117,114"
          fill="none" stroke="black" stroke-dasharray="6 1"></path>
        <polygon points="120,114 116,124 114,113"></polygon> </a> </g>

      <g id="Rectrac-toCR" role="listitem" fill="#060">
        <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeCR" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-tocr-label Rectrac-tocr-text">
        <title id="Rectrac-tocr-label">Advance to Candidate Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="Rectrac-tocr-text" x="138" y="134" font-size="8">Director's approval</text>
          <path stroke="#060" d="M135,140h81"></path>
          <polygon points="211,136 221,140 211,144"></polygon></a> </g>
    </g>

    <g id="Rectrac-nodeCR" role="list" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-nodecr-label">
      <title id="Rectrac-nodecr-label">Candidate recommendation - Patent Policy Exclusion Opportunity</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsCR">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="38" cy="140" cx="260" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" y="144" x="260" text-anchor="middle">CR</text></a>

<!-- a instead of g -->

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeCR" id="Rectrac-repeatCR"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-repeatcr-label Rectrac-repeatcr-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="Rectrac-repeatcr-label">Publish a revised CR</title>
        <text role="none" font-size="8" id="Rectrac-repeatcr-text">
          <tspan x="225" y="84">Working Group Decision,</tspan>
          <tspan x="240" y="96">Directors approval</tspan></text>
        <path stroke="#000" d="M242,124C238,114 244,104 260,104 271,104 277,108 279,114"
          stroke-dasharray="5 11" fill="none"></path>
        <path stroke="#060" d="M242,124C238,114 244,104 260,104 271,104 277,108 279,114"
          stroke-dasharray="5 11" stroke-dashoffset="8" fill="none"></path>
        <polygon points="282,114 277,124 275,113"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodePR" id="Rectrac-ToPR"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-topr-label Rectrac-topr-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="Rectrac-topr-label">Advance to Proposed Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="Rectrac-topr-text" x="300" y="134" font-size="8">Director's approval</text>
        <path d="M298,140h77" stroke="#060"></path>
        <polygon points="374,136 384,140 374,144"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeWD" id="Rectrac-backToWD"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-backtowd-label Rectrac-backtowd-text" fill="#600">
        <title id="Rectrac-backtowd-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text role="none" id="Rectrac-backtowd-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="142" y="160">WG or Director decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="144" y="170">e.g. for further review</tspan></text>
        <path d="M140,147h84" stroke-dasharray="4 4" stroke="#600"></path>
        <polygon points="140,145 133,147 140,149"></polygon> </a>
    </g>

    <g id="Rectrac-nodePR" role="list" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-nodepr-label">
      <title id="Rectrac-nodepr-label">Proposed Recommendation - Advisory Committee Review</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsPR">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="28" cy="140" cx="413" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" font-family="Times,serif" y="144" x="413" text-anchor="middle">PR</text></a>

<!-- use a[role=listitem] instead of g -->

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeRec" id="Rectrac-ToRec" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-torec-label Rectrac-torec-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="Rectrac-torec-label">Advance to Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="Rectrac-torec-text" x="300" y="138" font-size="8">  
          <tspan x="445" y="124">Advisory Committee Review</tspan>
          <tspan x="445" y="134">Director's Decision</tspan></text>

        <path d="M441,140h100" stroke="#060"></path>
        <polygon points="534,136 544,140 534,144"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeCR" id="Rectrac-BackToCR" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-backtocr-label Rectrac-backtocr-text" fill="#600">
        <title id="Rectrac-backtocr-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text id="Rectrac-backtocr-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="306" y="160">AC Review, </tspan>
          <tspan x="302" y="170">Director Decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="304" y="180">e.g. for minor changes</tspan></text>
        <path d="M301,147h88" stroke-dasharray="3 5" stroke="#600"></path>
        <polygon points="301,145 296,147 301,149"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Rectrac-nodeWD" id="Rectrac-PRBackToWD" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="Rectrac-prbacktowd-label Rectrac-prbacktowd-text" fill="#c00">
        <title id="Rectrac-prbacktowd-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text role="none" id="Rectrac-prbacktowd-text" font-size="9">
          <tspan x="90" y="202">Advisory Committee review and Director's Decision, e.g. for further work and review</tspan></text>
        <path d="M413,158v32h-316v-26" stroke-dasharray="2 2" stroke="#c00" fill="none"></path>
        <polygon points="95,164 97,159 99,164"></polygon> </a>
    </g>

    <g id="Rectrac-nodeRec" stroke="black" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-noderec-label" role="list">
      <title id="Rectrac-noderec-label">W3C Recommendation</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsW3C" aria-labelledby="Rectrac-noderec-label">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="28" cy="140" cx="573" fill="#fff" stroke-width="2"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="16" y="144" x="573"
          text-anchor="middle" stroke-width=".3">REC</text></a>


  </g>
 </g>

</svg>
      </p>

      <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="#tr-end">end work on a technical report</a> at any time.</p>

      <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> decline a request to advance 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-levels">maturity level</a>. The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform the
        <a href="#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 the specification is returned to a Working Group for further work.</p>

      <h4 id="maturity-levels">6.1.2 Maturity Levels</h4>

      <dl>
        <dt id="RecsWD">Working Draft (WD)</dt>
        <dd>A Working Draft is a document that W3C has published for review by the community, including W3C Members, the public,
          and other technical organizations. Some, but not all, Working Drafts are meant to advance to 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> 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 id="RecsCR">Candidate Recommendation (CR)</dt>
        <dd class="changed">A Candidate Recommendation is a document that satisfies the Working Group's technical requirements,
          and has already received wide review. W3C publishes a Candidate Recommendation to
          <ul>
            <li>signal to the wider community that it is time to do a final review</li>
            <li>gather <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation 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.</li>
            <li>Provide an exclusion opportunity per the
              <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
              [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]. <strong>Note</strong>: A Candidate Recommendation under this process
              corresponds to the "Last Call Working Draft" discussed in the Patent Policy.</li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
        <dd><strong>Note</strong>: Candidate Recommendations are expected to be acceptable 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 id="RecsPR">Proposed Recommendation</dt>
        <dd>A Proposed Recommendation is a document that has been accepted by the W3C Director as of sufficient quality to become
          a W3C Recommendation. This phase establishes a deadline for the Advisory Committee review that begins with
          Candidate Recommendation. Substantive changes <em class="rfc2119">must</em> not be made to a Proposed Recommendation
          except by publishing a new Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation.</dd>
        <dt id="RecsW3C">W3C Recommendation (REC)</dt>
        <dd>A W3C Recommendation is a specification or set of guidelines or requirements that, after extensive
          consensus-building, has received the endorsement of W3C Members and the Director. W3C recommends the wide deployment
          of its Recommendations as standards for the Web. The W3C Royalty-Free IPR licenses granted under the 
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
          apply to W3C Recommendations.</dd>
        <dt id="RecsObs">Obsolete Recommendation</dt>
         <dd>An Obsolete Recommendation is a specification that W3C does not believe has sufficient market relevance to continue
         recommending that the community implement it, but does not consider that there are fundamental problems that require the 
         Recommendation be Rescinded. It is possible for an Obsolete Recommendation to receive sufficient market uptake that W3C
         decides to restore it to Recommendation status. An Obsolete Recommendation has the same status as a W3C Recommendation 
         with regards to W3C Royalty-Free IPR licenses granted under the Patent Policy.</dd>
        <dt id="RescindedRec">Rescinded Recommendation</dt>
        <dd>A Rescinded Recommendation is an entire Recommendation that W3C no longer endorses, and believes is unlikely to ever
           be restored to Recommendation Status. See also clause 10 of the licensing
          requirements for W3C Recommendations in
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-Requirements">section 5</a> of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</dd>
        <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 useful document that is not intended to be a formal standard, or to document work that was
          abandoned without producing a Recommendation.</dd>
      </dl>

      <p>Working Groups and Interest Groups <em class="rfc2119">may</em> make available "Editor's drafts". Editor's drafts have
        no official standing whatsoever, and do not necessarily imply consensus of a Working Group or Interest Group, nor are
        their contents endorsed in any way by W3C.</p>

      <h3 id="requirements-and-definitions">6.2 General requirements and definitions</h3>

      <p>Please note that <dfn>publishing</dfn> as used in this document refers to producing a version which is listed as a
        W3C Technical Report on its <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">Technical Reports page https://www.w3.org/TR</a>
        [<a href="#ref-doc-list">PUB11</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="general-requirements">6.2.1 General requirements for Technical Reports</h4>

      <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="#ref-doc-list">PUB11</a>] is available at the W3C Web site. W3C strives to make archival documents
        indefinitely available at their original address in their original form.</p>

      <p>Every document published as part of the technical report development process <em class="rfc2119 old">must</em> clearly
        indicate its <a href="#maturity-levels">maturity level</a>, and <em id="DocumentStatus" class="rfc2119">must</em>
        include information about the status of the document. This status information</p>

      <ul>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> be unique each time a specification is published,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> state which Working Group 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">must</em> include expectations about next steps,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> explain how the technology relates to existing international standards and
          related work inside or outside W3C, 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 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> be a
        participant, per <a href="#group-participation">section 5.2.1</a> 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> [<a href="#ref-pubrules">PUB31</a>](e.g., for
        <span id="DocumentName">naming</span>, status information, style, and
        <span id="document-copyright">copyright requirements</span>). 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 Committee 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="#ref-translations">PUB18</a>] is available at the W3C Web site.</p>

      <h4 id="transition-reqs">6.2.2 Advancement on the Recommendation Track</h4>

      <p>For <em>all</em> <dfn>Transition Requests</dfn>, to advance a specification to a new maturity level other than Note,
        the Working Group:</p>

      <ul>
        <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.</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="#formal-address">formally 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="#FormalObjection">Formal Objections</a>.</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> provide public documentation of changes that are not substantive.</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> provide information about implementations known to the Working Group.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>For a First Public Working Draft there is no "previous maturity level", so many requirements do not apply, and
        approval is normally fairly automatic. For later stages, especially transition to Candidate or Proposed Recommendation,
        there is usually a formal review meeting to ensure the requirements have been met before Director's approval is given.</p>

      <p>Transition Requests to First Public Working Draft or <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a> will not normally 
        be approved while a Working Group's charter is undergoing or awaiting a Director's decision on an
        Advisory Committee Review.</p>

      <h4 id="doc-reviews">6.2.3 Reviews and Review Responsibilities</h4>

      <p>A document is available for review from the moment it is first published. Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        <a href="#formal-address">formally address</a> <em>any</em> substantive review comment about a technical report in a
        timely manner. </p>
      <p>Reviewers <em class="rfc2119">should</em> send substantive technical 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.

      <h5 id="wide-review">6.2.3.1 Wide Review</h5>

      <p>The requirements for wide review are not precisely defined by the W3C 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 (for example through notices posted to
        <a href="mailto:public-review-announce@w3.org">public-review-announce@w3.org</a>) and were able to actually perform
        reviews of and provide comments on the specification. A second objective is to encourage groups to request reviews
        early enough that comments and suggested changes can still be reasonably incorporated in response to the review. Before
        approving transitions, the Director will consider who has been explicitly offered a reasonable opportunity to review the
        document, who has provided comments, the record of requests to and responses from reviewers, especially
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/Charter.html#horizontal-review">W3C Horizontal Groups</a> and groups identified as
        dependencies in the charter or identified as <a href="https://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison.html">liaisons</a>
        [<a href="#ref-liaison-list">PUB29</a>], and seek evidence of clear communication to the general public about appropriate
        times and which content to review and whether such reviews actually occurred. </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 considered
        positive evidence of wide review. Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em> announce to other W3C Working Groups
        as well as the general public, especially those affected by this specification, a proposal to enter
        <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a> (for example in approximately four weeks). By contrast a
        generic statement in a document requesting review at any time is likely not to be considered as sufficient evidence
        that the group has solicited wide review. </p>

      <p>A Working Group could present evidence that wide review has been received, irrespective of solicitation. But it is
        important to note that receiving many detailed reviews is not necessarily the same as wide review, since they might only
        represent comment from a small segment of the relevant stakeholder community.</p>

      <h4 id="implementation-experience">6.2.4 Implementation Experience</h4>

      <p>Implementation experience is required to show that a specification is sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to market
        needs, to ensure 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
        <dfn>adequate implementation experience</dfn> the Director will consider (though not be limited to):</p>
      <ul>
        <li>is each feature of the current specification implemented, and how is this demonstrated?</li>
        <li>are there independent interoperable implementations of the current specification?</li>
        <li>are there implementations created by people other than the authors of the specification?</li>
        <li>are implementations publicly deployed?</li>
        <li>is there implementation experience at all levels of the specification's ecosystem (authoring, consuming, publishing…)?</li>
        <li>are there reports of difficulties or problems with implementation?</li>
      </ul>
      <p>Planning and accomplishing a demonstration of (interoperable) implementations can be very time consuming. Groups are
        often able to work more effectively if they plan how they will demonstrate interoperable implementations early in the
        development process; for example, developing tests in concert with implementation efforts.</p>

      <h4 id="correction-classes">6.2.5 Classes of Changes</h4>

      <p>This document distinguishes the following 4 classes of changes to a specification. The first two classes of change are
        considered <dfn id="editorial-change">editorial changes</dfn>, the latter two
        <dfn id="substantive-change">substantive changes</dfn>.</p>
      <dl>
        <dt>1. No changes to text content</dt>
        <dd>These changes include fixing broken links, style sheets or invalid markup.</dd>
        <dt>2. Corrections that do not affect conformance</dt>
        <dd>Changes that reasonable implementers would not interpret as changing architectural or interoperability requirements
          or their implementation. Changes which resolve ambiguities in the specification are considered to change 
          (by clarification) the implementation requirements and do not fall into this class.</dd>
        <dd>Examples of changes in this class include correcting non-normative code examples where the code clearly conflicts with
          normative requirements, clarifying informative use cases or other non-normative text, fixing typos or grammatical errors
          where the change does not change implementation requirements. If there is any doubt or dissent as to whether requirements
          are changed, such changes do not fall into this class.</dd>
        <dt>3. Corrections that do not add new features</dt>
        <dd>These changes <em class="rfc2119">may</em> affect conformance to the specification. A change that affects conformance
          is one that:
          <ul>
            <li>makes conforming data, processors, or other conforming agents become non-conforming according to the new version,
              or</li>
            <li>makes non-conforming data, processors, or other agents become conforming, or</li>
            <li>clears up an ambiguity or under-specified part of the specification in such a way that data, a processor, or an
              agent whose conformance was once unclear becomes clearly either conforming or non-conforming.</li>
          </ul>
        </dd>
        <dt>4. New features</dt>
        <dd>Changes that add a new functionality, element, etc.</dd>
      </dl>

      <h3 id="working-draft">6.3 Working Draft</h3>

      <p>A Public Working Draft is published on the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">W3C's Technical Reports page</a>
       [<a href="#ref-doc-list">PUB11</a>] for review, and for simple historical reference. For all Public Working Drafts a
       Working Group:</p>
      <ul>
        <li> <em class="rfc2119">should</em> document outstanding issues, and parts 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 its content is considered unstable
          and does not meet all Working Group requirements.</li>
      </ul>

      <h4 id="first-wd">6.3.1 First Public Working Draft</h4>

      <p>To publish the First Public Working Draft of a document, a Working Group <em class="rfc2119">must</em> meet the
        applicable <a href="#transition-reqs">general requirements for advancement</a>.</p>
      <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication of a First Public Working Draft publication to
        other W3C groups and to the public. </p>
      <p>Publishing the First Public Working Draft triggers a Call for Exclusions, per
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="revised-wd">6.3.2 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 previous published document that would benefit from review beyond the Working Group. </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>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>
        <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>
        <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>
        <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>
      </ul>
      <p>Possible next steps for any Working Draft:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>Revised <a href="#revised-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>
      <h4 id="tr-end">6.3.3 Stopping Work on a specification</h4>
      <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="#GeneralTermination">closes a Working Group</a> W3C <em class="rfc2119">must </em> publish any unfinished
        specifications on the Recommendation track as <a href="#Note">Working Group Notes</a>. 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 <a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a>. </p>

      <h3 id="candidate-rec"><a id="last-call">6.4 Candidate Recommendation </a></h3>

      <p>To publish a Candidate recommendation, in addition to meeting the
        <a href="#transition-reqs">general requirements for advancement</a> a Working Group:</p>
      <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>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document changes to dependencies during 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">must</em> be 
          <strong>at least</strong> four weeks after publication, and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be longer for
          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 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> begin an Advisory Committee Review on the question of whether the
        specification is appropriate to publish as a W3C Recommendation.</p>
      <p> A Candidate Recommendation corresponds to a "Last Call Working Draft" as used in the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].
        Publishing a Candidate Recommendation triggers a Call for Exclusions, per
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>
      <p>Possible next steps:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>Return to <a href="#revised-wd">Working Draft</a></li>
        <li>A revised <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
        <li><a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a> (The expected next step)</li>
        <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
      </ul>
      <p><a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an
        <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> of the decision to advance the technical report.</p>

      <h4 id="revised-cr">6.4.1 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 revision of a Candidate Recommendation. This is because substantive changes will generally require a
        new Exclusion Opportunity per <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].
        Note that approval is <em>expected</em> to be fairly simple compared to getting approval for a transition from
        Working Draft to Candidate Recommendation.</p>

      <p>In addition the Working Group:</p>
      <ul>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the revised specification meets all Working Group requirements, or explain
          why the requirements have changed or been deferred,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify the deadline for further comments, which <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be
          <strong>at least</strong> four weeks after publication, and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be longer for
          complex documents,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document the changes since the previous 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 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 revised Candidate Recommendation to 
        other W3C groups and the Public.</p>
      <h3 id="rec-pr">6.5 Proposed Recommendation</h3>
      <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general requirements for advancement</a>,</p>
      <ul>
        <li>The status information <em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify the deadline for Advisory Committee review, which
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong> 28 days after the publication of the
          Proposed Recommendation and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be at least 10 days after the end of the
          last Exclusion Opportunity per
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section 4</a> of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</li>
      </ul>
      <p>A Working Group:</p>
      <ul>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation experience</a>
          except where an exception is approved by the Director,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the document has received <a href="#wide-review">wide review,</a></li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that all issues raised during the Candidate Recommendation review period other
          than by Advisory Committee representatives acting in their formal AC representative role have been
          <a href="#formal-address">formally addressed</a>,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em>identify any substantive issues raised since the close of the Candidate Recommendation
          review period by parties other than Advisory Committee representatives acting in their formal AC representative role,</li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> have removed features identified in the Candidate Recommendation document as "at risk"
          without republishing the specification as a Candidate Recommendation.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>The Director:</p>
      <ul>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication of a Proposed Recommendation to the
          <a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a>, and</li>
        <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>
      </ul>
      <p>Since a W3C Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> include any substantive changes from the
        Proposed Recommendation it is based on, to make any substantive change to a Proposed Recommendation the Working Group
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> return the specification to <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a> or
        Working Draft.</p>
      <p>Possible Next Steps:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>Return to <a href="#revised-wd">Working Draft</a></li>
        <li>Return to <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a></li>
        <li><a href="#rec-publication">Recommendation status</a> (The expected next step)</li>
        <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
      </ul>
      <h3 id="rec-publication">6.6 W3C Recommendation</h3>
      <p>The decision to advance a document to Recommendation is a <a href="#def-w3c-decision">W3C Decision</a>.</p>
      <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general requirements for advancement</a>,</p>
      <ul>
        <li>A Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are tracked, and</li>
        <li>A Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> include any substantive changes from the Proposed Recommendation
          on which it is based.</li>
        <li>If there was any
          <a href="#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> publish the substantive content of the dissent
          to W3C and the general public, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em> <a href="#formal-address">formally address</a>
          the comment at least 14 days before publication as a W3C Recommendation.</li>
        <li><a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> of the W3C decision</li>
        <li>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication of a W3C Recommendation to <a href="#AC">Advisory
            Committee</a>, other W3C groups and to the public.</li>
      </ul>
      <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 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">6.7 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</h3>

      <p>This section details the management of errors in, and the process for making changes to a Recommendation. Please see also
        the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2003/01/republishing/">Requirements for modification of W3C Technical Reports</a>
        [<a href="#in-place-tr-mod">PUB35</a>].</p>
      <p>

<svg xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="-10 60 635 240" width="100%">
  <title>Flowchart: Revising a W3C Recommendation</title>
  <g id="Rectrac-basicProcess" role="list">

    <g id="Modif-FPWD" role="listitem" aria-labelledby="modif-fpwd-label modif-fpwd-text">
      <title id="modif-fpwd-label">First Public Working Draft - Exclusion Opportunity</title>
      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeWD">
        <rect fill="white" y="122" width="57" height="45"/>
        <text font-size="8"><tspan y="136" x="0">First WD</tspan>
          <tspan x="0" y="154">WG Decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="0" y="166">Director's approval</tspan></text>
        <path d="M0,140h53" fill="none" stroke="#000"></path>
        <polygon points="47,136 57,140 47,144"></polygon></a>
    </g>

    <g id="Modif-nodeWD" role="list" aria-labelledby="modif-nodewd-label">
      <title id="modif-nodewd-label">Working Draft</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsWD" aria-labelledby="modif-nodewd-label">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="38" cy="140" cx="97" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" y="144" x="97" text-anchor="middle">WD</text></a>


      <g id="Modif-repeatWD" role="listitem">
        <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeWD" aria-labelledby="modif-repeatwd-label modif-repeatwd-text">
        <title id="modif-repeatwd-label">Publish a New Working Draft</title>
        <text id="modif-repeatwd-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="30" y="84">WG Decision: review needed, or</tspan>
          <tspan x="40" y="96">No change for 6 months</tspan></text>
        <path d="M78,124C73,114 79,104 97,104 108,104 115,108 117,114"
          fill="none" stroke="black" stroke-dasharray="6 1"></path>
        <polygon points="120,114 116,124 114,113"></polygon> </a> </g>

      <g id="Modif-toCR" role="listitem" fill="#060">
        <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeCR" aria-labelledby="modif-tocr-label modif-tocr-text">
        <title id="modif-tocr-label">Advance to Candidate Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="modif-tocr-text" x="138" y="136" font-size="8">Director's approval</text>
          <path stroke="#060" d="M135,140h81"></path>
          <polygon points="211,136 221,140 211,144"></polygon></a> </g>
    </g>

    <g id="Modif-nodeCR" role="list" aria-labelledby="modif-nodecr-label">
      <title id="modif-nodecr-label">Candidate recommendation - Patent Policy Exclusion Opportunity</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsCR">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="38" cy="140" cx="260" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" y="144" x="260" text-anchor="middle">CR</text></a>

<!-- use a instead of g -->

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeCR" id="Modif-repeatCR"
        aria-labelledby="modif-repeatcr-label modif-repeatcr-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="modif-repeatcr-label">Publish a revised CR</title>
        <text role="none" font-size="8" id="modif-repeatcr-text">
          <tspan x="225" y="84">Working Group Decision,</tspan>
          <tspan x="240" y="96">Directors approval</tspan></text>
        <path stroke="#000" d="M242,124C238,114 244,104 260,104 271,104 277,108 279,114"
          stroke-dasharray="5 11" fill="none"></path>
        <path stroke="#060" d="M242,124C238,114 244,104 260,104 271,104 277,108 279,114"
          stroke-dasharray="5 11" stroke-dashoffset="8" fill="none"></path>
        <polygon points="275,114 277,124 282,113"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodePR" id="Modif-ToPR"
        aria-labelledby="modif-topr-label modif-topr-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="modif-topr-label">Advance to Proposed Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="modif-topr-text" x="300" y="136" font-size="8">Director's approval</text>
        <path d="M298,140h77" stroke="#060"></path>
        <polygon points="374,136 384,140 374,144"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeWD" id="Modif-backToWD"
        aria-labelledby="modif-backtowd-label modif-backtowd-text" fill="#600">
        <title id="modif-backtowd-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text role="none" id="modif-backtowd-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="140" y="160">WG or Director decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="142" y="172">e.g. for further review</tspan></text>
        <path d="M140,147h84" stroke-dasharray="4 4" stroke="#600"></path>
        <polygon points="140,145 133,147 140,149"></polygon> </a>
    </g>

    <g id="Modif-nodePR" role="list" aria-labelledby="modif-nodepr-label">
      <title id="modif-nodepr-label">Proposed Recommendation - Advisory Committee Review</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsPR">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="28" cy="140" cx="413" stroke="black" fill="#fff"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="14" font-family="Times,serif" y="144" x="413" text-anchor="middle">PR</text></a>

<!--  use a[role=listitem] instead of g -->

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeRec" id="Modif-ToRec" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="modif-torec-label modif-torec-text" fill="#060">
        <title id="modif-torec-label">Advance to Recommendation</title> 
        <text role="none" id="modif-torec-text" x="300" y="138" font-size="8">  
          <tspan x="445" y="128">Advisory Committee Review</tspan>
          <tspan x="445" y="136">Director's Decision</tspan></text>

        <path d="M441,140h100" stroke="#060"></path>
        <polygon points="534,136 544,140 534,144"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeCR" id="Modif-BackToCR" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="modif-backtocr-label modif-backtocr-text" fill="#600">
        <title id="modif-backtocr-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text id="modif-backtocr-text" font-size="8">
          <tspan x="306" y="158">AC Review, </tspan>
          <tspan x="302" y="168">Director Decision</tspan>
          <tspan x="304" y="178">e.g. for minor changes</tspan></text>
        <path d="M301,147h88" stroke-dasharray="3 5" stroke="#600"></path>
        <polygon points="301,145 296,147 301,149"></polygon> </a>

      <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeWD" id="Modif-PRBackToWD" role="listitem"
        aria-labelledby="modif-prbacktowd-label modif-prbacktowd-text" fill="#c00">
        <title id="modif-prbacktowd-label">Return to Working Draft</title> 
        <text role="none" id="modif-prbacktowd-text" font-size="9">
          <tspan x="92" y="202">Advisory Committee review and Director's Decision, e.g. for further work and review</tspan></text>
        <path d="M413,158v32h-316v-26" stroke-dasharray="2 2" stroke="#c00" fill="none"></path>
        <polygon points="95,164 97,159 99,164"></polygon> </a>
    </g>

    <g id="Modif-nodeRec" stroke="black" aria-labelledby="modif-noderec-label" role="list">
      <title id="modif-noderec-label">W3C Recommendation</title>
      <a xlink:href="#RecsW3C" aria-labelledby="modif-noderec-label">
        <ellipse ry="18" rx="28" cy="140" cx="573" fill="#fff" stroke-width="2"></ellipse>
        <text font-size="16" y="144" x="573"
          text-anchor="middle" stroke-width=".3">REC</text></a>


      <a xlink:href="#Modif-TextChanges" id="Modif-ChangeProposal" aria-labelledby="Modif-changeproposal-title">
        <title id="Modif-changeproposal-tit">Proposed change to a Recommendation</title>
        <path d="M573,158 v30"></path>
        <polygon points="573,188 571,181 575,181"></polygon>
    </g>
  </g>
 </g>

<g aria-labelledby="modif-overall-title">
 <title id="modif-overall-title">Initial maturity levels for a modification</title>
    <g id="Modif-TextChanges" stroke="black" stroke-width="2" role="list">
      <g role="listitem" tabindex="0">
        <polygon points="573,188 623,213 573,238 520,213" fill="white"></polygon>
        <text id="modif-textchanges-text" text-anchor="middle" font-size="10" stroke="none">
          <tspan x="573" y="212">Substantive</tspan>
          <tspan x="573" y="222">Changes?</tspan></text></g>

        <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeRec" aria-labelledby="modif-editedrec-title">
          <title id="modif-editedrec-title">Only editorial changes: Edited Recommendation</title>
          <text role="none" x="510" y="207" font-size="10" stroke="none">No</text>
          <text text-anchor="end" font-size="10" stroke="none">
            <tspan x="507" y="170">Director's</tspan><tspan x="504" y="180">approval</tspan></text>
          <path fill="none" d="M520,213h-16c0,-35 11,-54 44,-60"></path>
          <polygon points="548,152 543,152 545,156"></polygon></a>

        <a xlink:href="#Modif-SubstantiveChanges">
          <text x="578" y="255" font-size="10" stroke="none">Yes</text>
          <path fill="none" d="M573,238v22h-108c-25,0 -30,-44 -55,-49h-80v15"></path>
          <polygon points="330,226 328,219 332,219"></polygon></a>
        </g>

    <g id="Modif-NewFeatures" stroke="black" stroke-width="2" role="list">
      <g role="listitem" tabindex="0">
        <polygon points="330,278 370,253 330,228 290,253" fill="white"></polygon>
        <text font-size="10" text-anchor="middle" stroke="none">
          <tspan x="330" y="250">New</tspan>
          <tspan x="330" y="260" text-anchor="middle">Features?</tspan></text></g>

        <a xlink:href="#Modif-nodeCR" aria-labelledby="modif-nonewfeatures-label director-approval-text"
          stroke="black" stroke-width="2">
          <title id="modif-nonewfeatures-label">No new features - return to Candidate Recommendation</title>
          <path d="M290,253h-30v-44" fill="none"></path>
          <path d="M260,185v-20"></path>
          <text role="none" x="280" y="245" stroke="none" font-size="10">No</text>
          <text text-anchor="end" font-size="10" stroke="none">
            <tspan x="254" y="225">Director's</tspan><tspan x="254" y="235">approval</tspan></text>
          <polygon points="260,160 262,165 258,165" stroke="black"></polygon></a>

        <a xlink:href="#Modif-FPWD" aria-labelledby="modif-fpwd-label modif-fpwd-text"
          stroke="black" stroke-width="2">
             <text x="335" y="286" font-size="10" stroke="none">Yes</text>
            <path d="M330,278v12h-335v-150h10" fill="none"></path></a>
    </g>
  </g>
</svg>

      </p>

      <h4 id="errata">6.7.1 Errata Management</h4>

      <p>Tracking errors is an important part of a Working Group's ongoing care of a Recommendation; for this reason,
        the scope of a Working Group charter generally allows time for work after publication of a Recommendation.
        In this Process Document, the term "erratum" (plural "errata") refers to any error that can be resolved by one or more
        changes in classes 1-3 of section <a href="#correction-classes">7.2.5 Classes of Changes</a>.</p>

      <p>Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">must</em> keep a record as errors are reported by readers and implementers.
        Such error reports <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be processed no less frequently than quarterly. Readers of the
        Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        be able easily to find and see the errata that apply to that specific Recommendation.</p>

      <p> Working Groups decide how to document errata. The best practice is a document that identifies itself as based on the
        Recommendation text and clearly identifies the errata and any proposed corrections; other approaches include various
        forms of an errata page, possibly auto-generated from a database.</p>

      <p>An erratum is resolved by an informative, "proposed" correction generated by the Working Group. A correction
        becomes part of the Recommendation by the process for Revising a Recommendation described in the next section.</p>

      <h4 id="revised-rec">6.7.2 Revising a Recommendation</h4>

      <p>A Working group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request republication of a Recommendation, or W3C
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> republish a Recommendation, to make corrections that do not result in any changes to the
        text of the specification.</p>

      <p><a href="#editorial-change">Editorial changes</a> to a Recommendation require no technical review of the proposed changes.
        A Working Group, provided there are no votes against the resolution to publish <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request
        publication of a <a href="#rec-publication">Recommendation</a> or W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish a
        <a href="#rec-publication">Recommendation</a> to make this class of change without passing through earlier maturity levels.
        Such publications are called <dfn>Edited Recommendation</dfn>s.</p>

      <p>To make corrections to a Recommendation that produce <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> but do not
        add new features, or where there were votes against publishing the corrections directly as a
        <a href="#rec-pr">Recommendation</a>, a Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a
        <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a>, without passing through earlier maturity levels.</p>

      <p>In the latter two cases, the resulting Recommendation is called an
        <dfn id="rec-edited">Edited Recommendation</dfn>.</p>
      <p>When requesting the publication of an Edited Recommendation as described in this section, in addition to meeting the
        requirements for the relevant maturity level, a Working Group</p>
      <ul>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the changes to the document have received
          <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>, and </li>
        <li><em class="rfc2119">should</em> address all recorded errata.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>For changes which introduces a new feature or features, W3C <em class="rfc2119">must</em> follow the full process of
        <a href="#rec-advance">advancing a technical report to Recommendation</a> beginning with a new
        First Public Working Draft.</p>

      <h3 id="Note">6.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</h3>

      <p>Working Groups and Interest Groups <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish work as W3C Notes. Examples include:</p> 
      <ul>
        <li>supporting documentation for a specification, such as explanations of design principles or 
          use cases and requirements,</li>
        <li>non-normative guides to good practices,
        <li>specifications where work has been stopped and there is no longer consensus for making them a new standard.</li>
      </ul>
      <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 changes to the technical report since any previous
          publication.</li>
      </ul>
      <p>Possible next steps:</p>
      <ul>
        <li>End state: A technical report <em class="rfc2119">may</em> remain a Working or Interest Group Note indefinitely</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="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
        does not specify any licensing requirements or commitments for Working Group Notes.</p>

      <h3 id="rec-rescind">6.9 Obsoleting or Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</h3>

      <p>It is possible that W3C decides that implementing a particular Recommendation is no longer recommended.
        There are two designations for such specifications, chosen depending on how strongly W3C wishes to advise against
        using the specification.</p> 

      <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> obsolete a Recommendation, for example if the W3C Community decides that
        the Recommendation no longer represents best practices, or is not adopted and is not apparently likely to be adopted.
        An Obsolete Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be restored to normal Recommendation,
        for example because despite marking it Obsolete the specification is later more broadly adopted.</p>

      <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> rescind a Recommendation if W3C believes there is no reasonable prospect
        of it being restored for example due to burdensome patent claims that affect implementers and cannot be resolved; see the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
        [<a href="#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>.</p>

      <p>W3C only rescinds or obsoletes entire Recommendations. To rescind or obsolete some part of a Recommendation,
        W3C follows the process for <a href="#rec-modify">modifying a Recommendation</a>.</p>

      <p class="note">For the purposes of the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a>
       [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>] an Obsolete Recommendation has the status of an active Recommendation,
       although it is not recommended for future implementation; a Rescinded Recommendation ceases to be in effect
       and no new licenses are granted under the Patent Policy.</p>

      <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> recommend obsoleting, rescinding, or restoring a Recommendation. The Director
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> begin an <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a> of a
        proposal to obsolete, rescind, or restore a Recommendation when requested to do so by any of the following:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>The Working Group who produced, or is chartered to maintain, the Recommendation.</li>
        <li>The TAG, if there is no such Working Group</li>
        <li>Any individual who made a request to the relevant Working Group as described above, or the TAG if such a group
          does not exist, to obsolete, rescind, or restore a Recommendation, where the request was not answered
          within 90 days</li>
        <li>5% of the members of the Advisory Committee</li>
      </ul>

      <p id="proposed-rescinded-rec">For any <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a> of a
        proposal to obsolete, rescind, or restore a Recommendation the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em>:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>announce the proposal to all Working Group Chairs, and to the Public, as well as to the Advisory Committee</li>
        <li>indicate that this is a proposal to Rescind, Obsolete, or restore, a Recommendation as appropriate</li>
        <li>identify the Recommendation by URL</li>
        <li>publish a rationale for the proposal</li>
        <li>identify known dependencies and solicit review from all dependent Working Groups</li>
        <li>solicit public review</li>
        <li>specify the deadline for review comments, which <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be at least four weeks after
          the Director's announcement</li>
      </ul>

      <p>and <em class="rfc2119">should</em></p>

      <ul>
        <li>identify known implementations.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>If there was any <a href="#def-Dissent" rel="glossary"><span class="dfn-instance">dissent</span></a>
        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="#formal-address">formally address</a> the dissent at least 14 days before publication as an
        Obsolete or Rescinded Recommendation.</p> 

      <p>The <a href="#AC">Advisory Committee</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an 
        <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> of the Director's decision.</p>

      <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">must</em> publish an Obsolete or Rescinded Recommendation with up to date status.
        The updated version <em class="rfc2119">may</em> remove the main body of the document. The Status of this Document section
        <em class="rfc2119">should</em> link to the explanation of <a href="https://www.w3.org/2016/11/obsoleting-rescinding/">Obsoleting and Rescinding W3C Specifications</a> [<a href="#ref-obs-resc">PUB39</a>] as appropriate.</p>

      <p>Once W3C has published a Rescinded Recommendation, future W3C technical reports
        <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> include normative references to that technical report.</p>

      <p><span style="font-weight: bold;">Note:</span> W3C strives to ensure that all Technical Reports will continue to be
        available at their version-specific URL.</p>

      <h3 id="further-reading">6.10 Further reading</h3>

      <p>Refer to <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/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 announcements of the various steps, and
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/05/rec-tips">tips on getting to Recommendation faster</a>
       [<a href="#ref-rec-tips">PUB27</a>].</p>

      <h2 id="ReviewAppeal">7 Advisory Committee Reviews, Appeals, and Votes</h2>

      <p>This section describes how the Advisory Committee reviews proposals from the Director and how Advisory Committee
        representatives initiate an Advisory Committee Appeal of a W3C decision or Director's decision. A 
        <dfn id="def-w3c-decision">W3C decision</dfn> is one where the Director (or the Director's delegate) has exercised the role
        of assessing consensus after an <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a>.</p>

      <h3 id="ACReview">7.1 Advisory Committee Reviews</h3>

      <p>The Advisory Committee reviews:</p>

      <ul>
        <li><a href="#CharterReview">new and modified Working and Interest Groups</a>,</li>
        <li><a href="#cfr">Proposed Recommendations</a>, <a href="#cfr-edited">Proposed Edited Recommendations</a>,
          <a href="#proposed-rescinded-rec">Proposal to Rescind a Recommendation</a>, and</li>
        <li><a href="#GAProcess">Proposed changes to the W3C process</a>.</li>
      </ul>

      <h4 id="ACReviewStart">7.1.1 Start of a Review Period</h4>

      <p>Each Advisory Committee review period begins with a Call for Review from the Team to the Advisory Committee. The
        <dfn id="reviewform">Call for Review</dfn> describes the proposal, raises attention to deadlines, estimates when the decision
        will be available, and includes other practical information. Each Member organization <em class="rfc2119">may</em> send one
        review, which <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be returned by its Advisory Committee representative.</p>

      <p>The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide two channels for Advisory Committee review comments:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>an archived <a href="#Team-only">Team-only</a> channel;</li>
        <li>an archived <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a> channel.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>The Call for Review <em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify which channel is the default for review comments on that Call.</p>

      <p>Reviewers <em class="rfc2119">may</em> send information to either or both channels. They <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also
        share their reviews with other Members on the <a href="#ACCommunication">Advisory Committee discussion list</a>.</p>

      <p>A Member organization <em class="rfc2119">may</em> modify its review during a review period (e.g., in light of comments
       from other Members).</p>

      <h4 id="ACReviewAfter">7.1.2 After the Review Period</h4>

      <p>After the review period, the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce to the Advisory Committee the level of
        support for the proposal (<a href="#def-Consensus">consensus</a> or <a href="#def-Dissent">dissent</a>). The Director
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> also indicate whether there were any Formal Objections, with attention to
        <a href="#confidentiality-change">changing confidentiality level</a>. This <a href="#def-w3c-decision">W3C decision</a>
        is generally one of the following:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>The proposal is approved, possibly with minor changes integrated.</li>
        <li>The proposal is approved, possibly with <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> integrated. In this case
          the Director's announcement <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include rationale for the decision to advance the document
          despite the proposal for a substantive change.</li>
        <li>The proposal is returned for additional work, with a request to the initiator to
          <a href="#formal-address">formally address</a> certain issues.</li>
        <li>The proposal is rejected.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>This document does not specify time intervals between the end of an Advisory Committee review period and the
        <a href="#def-w3c-decision">W3C decision</a>. This is to ensure that the Members and Team have sufficient time to consider
        comments gathered during the review. The Advisory Committee <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> expect an announcement
        sooner than <span class="time-interval">two weeks</span> after the end of a Proposed Recommendation review period. If,
        after <span class="time-interval">three weeks</span>, the Director has not announced the outcome, the Director
        <em class="rfc2119">should</em> provide the Advisory Committee with an update.</p>

      <h3 id="ACAppeal">7.2 Appeal by Advisory Committee Representatives</h3>

      <p>Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> appeal certain decisions, though appeals are only expected
        to occur in extraordinary circumstances.</p>

      <p>When a W3C decision is made following an <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a>, Advisory Committee
        representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an <a href="#def-w3c-decision">Advisory Committee Appeal</a>.
        These W3C decisions include those related to group creation and modification, and transitions to new maturity levels
        for Recommendation Track documents and the Process document.</p>

      <p>Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also initiate an appeal for certain Director's decisions
        that do not involve an Advisory Committee review. These cases are identified in the sections which describe the
        requirements for the Director's decision and include additional (non-reviewed) maturity levels of Recommendation Track
        documents, group charter extensions and closures, and Memoranda of Understanding.</p>

      <p>In all cases, an appeal <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be initiated within <span class="time-interval">three weeks</span>
        of the decision.</p>

      <p>An Advisory Committee representative initiates an appeal by sending a request to the Team. Within one week the Team 
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the appeal process to the Advisory Committee and provide a mechanism for
        Advisory Committee representatives to respond with a statement of support (yes, no, or abstain) and comments, as desired.
        The archive of these comments <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be Member-visible. If, within
        <span class="time-interval">one week</span> of the Team's announcement, 5% or more of the Advisory Committee support the
        appeal request, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> organize an appeal vote asking the Advisory Committee to
        approve or reject the decision.
        <!-- Voting procedure to be determined --></p>

      <h3 id="ACVotes">7.3 Advisory Committee Votes</h3>

      <p>The Advisory Committee votes in <a href="#AB-TAG-elections">elections for seats on the TAG or Advisory Board</a>, and in
        the event of an <a href="#def-w3c-decision">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> achieving the required support to trigger an
        appeal vote.. Whenever the Advisory Committee votes, each Member or group of <a href="#MemberRelated">related Members</a>
        has one vote. In the case of <a href="#AB-TAG-elections">Advisory Board and TAG elections</a>, "one vote" means
        "one vote per available seat".</p>

      <h2 id="GAEvents">8 Workshops and Symposia</h2>

      <p>The Team organizes <dfn id="EventsW">Workshops</dfn> and <dfn id="EventsS">Symposia</dfn> to promote early involvement in
        the development of W3C activities from Members and the public.</p>

      <p>The goal of a Workshop is usually either to convene experts and other interested parties for an exchange of ideas about a
        technology or policy, or to address the pressing concerns of W3C Members. Organizers of the first type of Workshop
        <em class="rfc2119">may</em> solicit position papers for the Workshop program and <em class="rfc2119">may</em> use those
        papers to choose attendees and/or presenters.</p>

      <p>The goal of a Symposium is usually to educate interested parties about a particular subject.</p>

      <p>The Call for Participation in a Workshop or Symposium <em class="rfc2119">may</em> indicate participation requirements or 
        limits, and expected deliverables (e.g., reports and minutes). Organization of an event does not guarantee further
        investment by W3C in a particular topic, but <em class="rfc2119">may</em> lead to proposals for
        new activities or groups.</p>

      <p>Workshops and Symposia generally last one to three days. If a Workshop is being organized to address the pressing concerns
        of Members, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> issue the Call for Participation no later than
        <span class="time-interval">six weeks</span> prior to the Workshop's scheduled start date. For other Workshops and
        Symposia, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> issue a Call for Participation no later than
        <span class="time-interval">eight weeks</span> prior to the meeting's scheduled start date. This helps ensure that speakers
        and authors have adequate time to prepare position papers and talks.</p>

      <h2 id="Liaisons">9 Liaisons</h2>

      <p>W3C uses the term "liaison" to refer to coordination of activities with a variety of organizations, through a number of
        mechanisms ranging from very informal (e.g., an individual from another organization participates in a W3C Working Group,
        or just follows its work) to mutual membership, to even more formal agreements. Liaisons are not meant to substitute for
        W3C membership.</p>

      <p>All liaisons <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be coordinated by the Team due to requirements for public communication;
        patent, copyright, and other IPR policies; confidentiality agreements; and mutual membership agreements.</p>

      <p>The W3C Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> negotiate and sign a <dfn id="mou">Memorandum of Understanding
        (<abbr>MoU</abbr>)</dfn> with another organization. Before signing the MoU, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform
        the Advisory Committee of the intent to sign and make the MoU available for Advisory Committee review; Advisory Committee
        representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> of the decision
        to sign the MoU. Once approved, a Memorandum of Understanding <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be made public.</p>

      <p>Information about <a href="https://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison">W3C liaisons with other organizations</a> and the
        guidelines W3C follows when creating a liaison [<a href="#ref-liaison-list">PUB28</a>] is available on the Web.</p>

      <h2 id="Submission">10 Member Submission Process</h2>

      <p>The Member Submission process allows Members to propose technology or other ideas for consideration by the Team. After
        review, the Team <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish the material at the W3C Web site. The formal process affords Members
        a record of their contribution and gives them a mechanism for disclosing the details of the transaction with the Team
        (including IPR claims). The Team also publishes review comments on the Submitted materials for W3C Members, the public, and
        the media.</p>

      <p>A <dfn id="MemberSubmission">Member Submission</dfn> consists of:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>One or more documents developed outside of the W3C process, and</li>
        <li>Information about the documents, provided by the Submitter.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>One or more Members (called the "Submitter(s)") <em class="rfc2119">may</em> participate in a Member Submission. Only W3C
        Members <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be listed as Submitter(s).</p>

      <p>The Submission process consists of the following steps:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>One of the Submitter(s) sends a request to the Team to acknowledge the Submission request. The Team and Submitter(s)
          communicate to ensure that the Member Submission is complete.</li>
        <li>After Team review, the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> either acknowledge or reject the Submission request.

          <ul>
            <li>If <a href="#SubmissionYes">acknowledged</a>, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> publish the Member Submission
              at the public W3C Web site, in addition to Team comments about the Member Submission.</li>
            <li>If <a href="#SubmissionNo">rejected</a>, the Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate a 
              <dfn>Submission Appeal</dfn> to either the <a href="#TAG">TAG</a> or the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a>.</li>
          </ul>
        </li>
      </ol>

      <p><strong>Note:</strong> To avoid confusion about the Member Submission process, please note that:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>Documents in a Member Submission are developed outside of W3C. These documents are <strong>not</strong> part of the
          <a href="#Reports">technical report development process</a> (and therefore are not included in the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">index of W3C technical reports</a>). Members wishing to have documents developed outside
          of W3C published by W3C <em class="rfc2119">must</em> follow the Member Submission process.</li>
        <li>The Submission process is <strong>not</strong> a means by which Members ask for "ratification" of these documents as
          <a href="#RecsW3C">W3C Recommendations</a>.</li>
        <li>There is no requirement or guarantee that technology which is part of an acknowledged Submission request will receive
          further consideration by W3C (e.g., by a W3C Working Group).</li>
      </ul>

      <p>Publication of a Member Submission by W3C does not imply endorsement by W3C, including the W3C Team or Members. The
        acknowledgment of a Submission request does not imply that any action will be taken by W3C. It merely records publicly that
        the Submission request has been made by the Submitter. A Member Submission published by W3C
        <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> be referred to as "work in progress" of the W3C.</p>

      <p>The list of <a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/">acknowledged Member Submissions</a>
       [<a href="#ref-submission-list">PUB10</a>] is available at the W3C Web site.</p>

      <h3 id="SubmissionRights">10.1 Submitter Rights and Obligations</h3>

      <p>When more than one Member jointly participates in a Submission request, only one Member formally sends in the request.
        That Member <em class="rfc2119">must</em> copy each of the Advisory Committee representatives of the other participating
        Members, and each of those Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">must</em> confirm (by email to the Team)
        their participation in the Submission request.</p>

      <p>At any time prior to acknowledgment, any Submitter <em class="rfc2119">may</em> withdraw support for a Submission request
        (described in "<a href="https://www.w3.org/2000/09/submission">How to send a Submission request</a>"). A Submission request
        is "withdrawn" when no Submitter(s) support it. The Team <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> make statements about withdrawn
        Submission requests.</p>

      <p>Prior to acknowledgment, the Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">must not</em>, <strong>under any circumstances</strong>,
       refer to a document as "submitted to the World Wide Web Consortium" or "under consideration by W3C" or any similar phrase
       either in public or Member communication. The Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> imply in public or Member
       communication that W3C is working (with the Submitter(s)) on the material in the Member Submission. The Submitter(s)
       <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish the documents in the Member Submission prior to acknowledgment (without reference
       to the Submission request).</p>

      <p>After acknowledgment, the Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">must not</em>, <strong>under any circumstances</strong>, imply
        W3C investment in the Member Submission until, and unless, the material has been adopted as a deliverable of a W3C Working
        Group</p>

      <h4 id="SubmissionScope">10.1.1 Scope of Member Submissions</h4>

      <p>When a technology overlaps in scope with the work of a chartered Working Group, Members <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
        <a href="#group-participation">participate in the Working Group</a> and contribute the technology to the group's process
        rather than seek publication through the Member Submission process. The Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
        incorporate the contributed technology into its deliverables. If the Working Group does not incorporate the technology, it
        <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> publish the contributed documents as Working Group Notes since Working Group Notes
        represent group output, not input to the group.</p>

      <p>On the other hand, while W3C is in the early stages of developing a charter, Members <em class="rfc2119">should</em> use
        the Submission process to build consensus around concrete proposals for new work.</p>

      <p>Members <em class="rfc2119">should not</em> submit materials covering topics well outside the scope of
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission">W3C's mission</a> [<a href="#ref-mission">PUB15</a>].</p>

      <h4 id="SubmissionReqs">10.1.2 Information Required in a Submission Request</h4>

      <p>The Submitter(s) and any other authors of the submitted material <em class="rfc2119">must</em> agree that, if the request 
        is acknowledged, the documents in the Member Submission will be subject to the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">W3C Document License</a>
        [<a href="#ref-doc-license">PUB18</a>] and will include a reference to it. The Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
        hold the copyright for the documents in a Member Submission.</p>

      <p>The request <em class="rfc2119">must</em> satisfy the Member Submission licensing commitments of
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy#sec-submissions">section 3.3</a> of the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].</p>

      <p>The Submitter(s) <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include the following information:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>The list of all submitting Members.</li>
        <li>Position statements from all submitting Members (gathered by the Submitter). All position statements
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> appear in a separate document.</li>
        <li>Complete electronic copies of any documents submitted for consideration (e.g., a technical specification, a position
          paper, etc.) If the Submission request is acknowledged, these documents will be published by W3C and therefore
          <em class="rfc2119">must</em> satisfy the Communication Team's
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules">Publication Rules</a> [<a href="#ref-pubrules">PUB31</a>].
          Submitters <em class="rfc2119">may</em> hold the copyright for the material contained in these documents, but when
          published by W3C, these documents <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be subject to the provisions of the
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">W3C Document License</a>
          [<a href="#ref-doc-license">PUB18</a>].</li>
      </ul>

      <p>The request <em class="rfc2119">must</em> also answer the following questions.</p>

      <ul>
        <li>What proprietary technology is required to implement the areas addressed by the request, and what terms are associated
          with its use? Again, many answers are possible, but the specific answer will affect the Team's decision.</li>
        <li>What resources, if any, does the Submitter intend to make available if the W3C acknowledges the Submission request and
          takes action on it?</li>
        <li>What action would the Submitter like W3C to take if the Submission request is acknowledged?</li>
        <li>What mechanisms are there to make changes to the specification being submitted? This includes, but is not limited to,
          stating where change control will reside if the request is acknowledged.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>For other administrative requirements related to Submission requests, see
        "<a href="https://www.w3.org/2000/09/submission">How to send a Submission request</a>"
        [<a href="#ref-member-sub">MEM8</a>].</p>

      <h3 id="TeamSubmissionRights">10.2 Team Rights and Obligations</h3>

      <p>Although they are not technical reports, the documents in a Member Submission <em class="rfc2119">must</em> fulfil the
        requirements established by the Team, including the Team's
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules">Publication Rules</a>.</p>

      <p>The Team sends a <a id="validation-notice">validation notice</a> to the Submitter(s) once the Team has reviewed a
        Submission request and judged it complete and correct.</p>

      <p>Prior to a decision to <a href="#SubmissionYes">acknowledge</a> or <a href="#SubmissionNo">reject</a> the request, the
        request is <a href="#Team-only">Team-only</a>, and the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> hold it in the strictest 
        confidentiality. In particular, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> comment to the media about the Submission
        request.</p>

      <h3 id="SubmissionYes">10.3 Acknowledgment of a Submission Request</h3>

      <p>The Director <a href="#SubmissionYes">acknowledges</a> a Submission request by sending an announcement to the Advisory
        Committee. Though the announcement <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be made at any time, the Submitter(s) can expect an
        announcement between <span class="time-interval">four to six weeks</span> after the
        <a href="#validation-notice">validation notice</a>. The Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
        keep the Submitter(s) informed of when an announcement is likely to be made.</p>

      <p>Once a Submission request has been acknowledged, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em>:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>Publish the Member Submission.</li>
        <li>Publish Team comments about the Submission request.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>If the Submitter(s) wishes to modify a document published as the result of acknowledgment, the Submitter(s)
        <em class="rfc2119">must</em> start the Submission process from the beginning, even just to correct editorial changes.</p>

      <h3 id="SubmissionNo">10.4 Rejection of a Submission Request, and Submission Appeals</h3>

      <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">may</em> reject a Submission request for a variety of reasons, including any of the
        following:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>The ideas expressed in the request overlap in scope with the work of a chartered Working Group, and acknowledgment
          might jeopardize the progress of the group.</li>
        <li>The IPR statement made by the Submitter(s) is inconsistent with the W3C's
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">Patent Policy</a> [<a href="#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>],
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">Document License</a>
          [<a href="#ref-doc-license">PUB18</a>], or other IPR policies.</li>
        <li>The ideas expressed in the request are poor, might harm the Web, or run counter to
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission">W3C's mission</a>.</li>
        <li>The ideas expressed in the request lie well outside the scope of W3C's mission.</li>
      </ul>

      <p>In case of a rejection, the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> inform the Advisory Committee representative(s) of the
        Submitter(s). If requested by the Submitter(s), the Team <em class="rfc2119">must</em> provide rationale to the
        Submitter(s) about the rejection. Other than to the Submitter(s), the Team <em class="rfc2119">must not</em> make
        statements about why a Submission request was rejected.</p>

      <p>The Advisory Committee representative(s) of the Submitters(s) <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate a
        <a href="#SubmissionNo">Submission Appeal</a> of the Team's Decision to the <a href="#TAG">TAG</a> if the reasons are
        related to Web architecture, or to the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a> if the request is rejected for other
        reasons. In this case the Team <em class="rfc2119">should</em> make available its rationale for the rejection to the
        appropriate body. The Team will establish a process for such appeals that ensures the appropriate
        <a href="#confidentiality-levels">level of confidentiality</a>.</p>

      <h2 id="GAProcess">11 Process Evolution</h2>

      <p>The <span id="ProcessDoc">W3C Process Document</span> undergoes similar consensus-building processes as technical reports,
        with the <a href="#AB">Advisory Board</a> acting as the sponsoring Working Group.</p>

      <p>The Advisory Board initiates review of a Process Document as follows:</p>

      <ol>
        <li>The Team sends a Call for Review to the Advisory Committee and other W3C groups.</li>
        <li>After comments have been <a href="#formal-address">formally addressed</a> and the document possibly modified, the Team
          seeks endorsement from the Members by initiating an <a href="#ACReview">Advisory Committee review</a> of a
          Proposed Process Document.
          The review period <em class="rfc2119">must</em> last at least <span class="time-interval">four weeks</span>.</li>
        <li><a href="#ACReviewAfter">After the Advisory Committee review</a>, if there is consensus, the Team enacts the new
          process officially by announcing the <a href="#def-w3c-decision">W3C decision</a> to the Advisory Committee. 
          Advisory Committee representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> initiate an
          <a href="#ACAppeal">Advisory Committee Appeal</a> to the W3C.</li>
      </ol>

      <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> also modify a Process Document by following the processes for
        <a href="#rec-modify">modifying a Recommendation</a>.</p>

      <p>Reviews of the Process Document are not public reviews.</p>

      <h2 id="references">12 References</h2>

      <h3 id="public-refs">12.1 Public Resources</h3>

      <p>The following public information is available at the <a href="https://www.w3.org/">W3C Web site</a>.</p>

      <dl>
        <dt id="ref-join-w3c">[PUB5]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/join">How to Join W3C</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-member-agreement">[PUB6]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Agreement/Member-Agreement">Membership Agreement</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-current-mem">[PUB8]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List">The list of current W3C Members</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-activity-list">[PUB9]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/activities">The list of W3C Activities</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-submission-list">[PUB10]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/">The list of acknowledged Member Submissions</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-doc-list">[PUB11]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/">The W3C technical reports index</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-submission-overview">[PUB13]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/1996/Template/">Submission request overview</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-people">[PUB14]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/People/">The W3C Team</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-mission">[PUB15]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/">About the World Wide Web Consortium</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-team-submission-list">[PUB16]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/">The list of published Team Submissions</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-invited-expert">[PUB17]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/collaborators-agreement">Invited expert and collaborators agreement</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-doc-license">[PUB18]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">W3C Document License</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-software-license">[PUB19]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software">W3C Software Notice and License</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-translations">[PUB20]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/">Translations of W3C technical reports</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-pub-mailing-lists">[PUB21]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Mail/">Public W3C mailing lists</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-coi">[PUB23]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2000/09/06-conflictpolicy">Conflict of Interest Policy for W3C Team Members Engaged in Outside Professional Activities</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-tag-charter">[PUB25]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-tag-charter">Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Charter</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-tag-home">[PUB26]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/">The TAG home page</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-rec-tips">[PUB27]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/05/rec-tips">Tips for Getting to Recommendation Faster</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-liaison-list">[PUB28]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison">W3C liaisons with other organizations</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-ab-home">[PUB30]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/ab/">The Advisory Board home page</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-pubrules">[PUB31]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/pubrules">Publication Rules</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-fellows">[PUB32]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Recruitment/Fellows">W3C Fellows Program</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-patentpolicy">[PUB33]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/">5 Feb 2004 version of the W3C Patent Policy</a></cite>. The
          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/">latest version of the W3C Patent Policy</a> is available at
          https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/.</dd>
        <dt id="in-place-tr-mod">[PUB35]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2003/01/republishing/">In-place modification of W3C Technical Reports</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-calendar">[PUB36]</dt>
         <dd>The <cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/participate/eventscal">calendar of all scheduled official W3C events</a></cite> replaced the <a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Eventscal">former member-confidential version</a> [<a href="#oldref-mem-calendar">MEM3</a>].</dd>
        <dt id="ref-guide">[PUB37]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/">The Art of Consensus</a></cite>, a guidebook for W3C Working Group Chairs and other collaborators</dd>
        <dt id="ref-cepc">[PUB38]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/">W3C Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-obs-resc">[PUB39]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2016/11/obsoleting-rescinding/">Obsoleting and Rescinding W3C Specifications</a></cite></dd>

      </dl>

      <h3>12.2 <a id="member-refs">Member-only Resources</a></h3>

      <p>The following <a href="#Member-only">Member-only</a> information is available at the
        <a href="https://www.w3.org/">W3C Web site</a>.</p>

      <dl>
        <dt id="ref-current-ac">[MEM1]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/ACList">Current Advisory Committee representatives</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-mailing-lists">[MEM2]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/">Group mailing lists</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="oldref-mem-calendar">[MEM3]</dt>
         <dd>The Member-only <cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Eventscal">calendar of all scheduled official W3C events</a></cite> is no longer maintained. The information is now maintained in the public calendar [<a href="#ref-calendar">PUB36</a>]</dd>
        <dt id="ref-new-member">[MEM4]</dt>
         <dd>There is a <cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/faq.html">Member intro and FAQ</a></cite> as well as the <cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Intro">Process, Patent Policy, Finances Guide</a></cite> previously known as the "New Member Orientation", which includes an introduction to W3C processes from a practical standpoint, including relevant email addresses.</dd>
        <dt id="ref-ac-meetings">[MEM5]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/">Advisory Committee meetings</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-member-web">[MEM6]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Member/">Member Web site</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-member-sub">[MEM8]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2000/09/submission">How to send a Submission request</a></cite></dd>
        <dt>[MEM9]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/">The Art of Consensus</a></cite>, a guidebook for W3C Working Group Chairs and other collaborators, is now a Public resource [<a href="ref-guide">PUB37</a>]</dd>
        <dt id="ref-discipline-gl">[MEM14]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/09/discipline">Guidelines for Disciplinary Action</a></cite></dd>
        <dt id="ref-election-howto">[MEM15]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="https://www.w3.org/2002/10/election-howto">How to Organize an Advisory Board or TAG election</a></cite></dd>
      </dl>

      <h3 id="other-refs">12.3 Other References</h3>

      <dl>
        <dt id="ref-RFC2119">[RFC2119]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt">"Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"</a></cite>, S. Bradner, March 1997.</dd>
        <dt id="ref-RFC2777">[RFC2777]</dt>
         <dd><cite><a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2777.txt">"Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection"</a></cite>, D. Eastlake 3rd, February 2000.</dd>
      </dl>

      <h2 id="acks">13 Acknowledgments</h2>

      <p>The following individuals (some as individuals, others with the affiliation listed) have contributed to this
        proposal for a revised Process: Daniel Appelquist,
        David Baron (Mozilla), J Alan Bird (W3C), Carine Bournez (W3C), Wayne Carr (Intel),
        Tantek Çelik (Mozilla), Michael Champion (Microsoft), Maria Courtemanche (IBM), Donald Deutsch (Oracle),
        Geoffrey Creighton (Microsoft), Kevin Fleming (Bloomberg), Virginia Fournier (Apple), Virginie Galindo (Gemalto),
        Daniel Glazman (Disruptive Innovations), Michael Geldblum (Oracle), Ian Jacobs (W3C), Jeff Jaffe (W3C),
        Jay Kishigami 岸上順一 (NTT), Philippe LeHégaret (W3C), Coralie Mercier (W3C),
        Mark Nottingham, Peter Patel-Schneider, Scott Peterson (Google), Delfí Ramírez, Florian Rivoal, Wendy Seltzer (W3C),
        David Singer (Apple), Geoffrey Snedden, Josh Soref, Ralph Swick (W3C), 
        Léonie Watson (The Paciello Group), Ben Wilson, Chris Wilson (Google), Rigo Wenning (W3C), Helene Workman (Apple),
        Judy Zhu 朱红儒 (Alibaba), Steve Zilles (Adobe).
      <br>The editor is sorry for forgetting any names, and grateful to those who have listened patiently to conversations
        about this document, without feeling a need to add more.</p>

      <p>The following individuals contributed to the development of earlier versions of the Process:
        Jean-François Abramatic (IBM, and previously ILOG and W3C), Dan Appelquist (Telefonica), Art Barstow (Nokia, unaffiliated),
        Ann Bassetti (The Boeing Company), Jim Bell (HP), Robin Berjon (W3C), Tim Berners-Lee (W3C),
        Klaus Birkenbihl (Fraunhofer Gesellschaft), Judy Brewer (W3C), Don Brutzman (Web3D),
        Carl Cargill (Netscape, Sun Microsystems), Wayne Carr (Intel), Marcos Cáceres (Mozilla), Michael Champion (Microsoft),
        Paul Cotton (Microsoft), Mark Crawford (SAP), Tantek Çelik (Mozilla), Don Deutsch (Oracle), Karl Dubost (Mozilla),
        David Fallside (IBM), Fantasai (Mozilla), Wendy Fong (Hewlett-Packard), Virginie Galindo (Gemalto),
        Daniel Glazman (Disruptive Innovations), Paul Grosso (Arbortext), Eduardo Gutentag (Sun Microsystems), Joe Hall (CDT),
        Ivan Herman (W3C), Ian Hickson (Google), Brad Hill (Facebook), Steve Holbrook (IBM), Renato Iannella (IPR Systems),
        Ian Jacobs (W3C), Jeff Jaffe (W3C), Cullen Jennings (Cisco), Brain Kardell (JQuery), Sally Khudairi (W3C),
        John Klensin (MCI), Tim Krauskopf (Spyglass), Kari Laihonen (Ericsson), Ken Laskey (MITRE), Ora Lassila (Nokia),
        Håkon Wium Lie (Opera Software), Chris Lilley (W3C), Peter Linss (HP), Bede McCall (MITRE), Giri Mandyam (Qualcomm),
        Larry Masinter (Adobe Systems), Nigel Megitt (BBC), Olle Olsson (SICS), Mark Nottingham, Qiuling Pan (Huawei),
        TV Raman (Google),
        Thomas Reardon (Microsoft), Claus von Riegen (SAP AG), Natasha Rooney (GSMA), Sam Ruby (IBM), David Singer (Apple),
        David Singer (IBM), Henri Sivonen (Mozilla), Josh Soref (BlackBerry), Ralph Swick (W3C), Anne van Kesteren,
        Jean-Charles Verdié (MStar), Mike West (Google),  Chris Wilson (Google), Lauren Wood (unaffiliated),
        and Steve Zilles (Adobe Systems).</p>

      <h2 id="changes">14 Changes</h2>

      <p>This document is based on the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/">1 September 2015 Process</a>.
        <a href="https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/">Detailed logs of all changes</a> are available.</p>

      <p>Substantive changes compared to the <a href="https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/">1 September 2015 Process</a>
        include:</p>

      <ul>
        <li>Added link to document explaining Obsolete and Rescinded Recommendations - section <a href="#rec-rescind">6.9</a></li>
        <li>Allow Edited Recommendations to incorporate editorial changes without Advisory Committee review 
          - <a href="#revised-rec">Section 6.7.2</a></li>
        <li>Replace diagrams of Recommendation track with new versions to improve accessibility and accuracy
          - section <a href="#recs-and-notes">6.1.1</a> and section <a href="#rec-modify">6.7</a></li>
        <li>Remove statement that W3C does not organise conferences
          - section <a href="#GAEvents">8</a></li>
        <li>Added a process to make a Recommendation Obsolete - section <a href="#rec-rescind">6.9</a></li>
        <li>Clarified the process to rescind a Recommendation, aligning with with obsoleting a Recommendation
          - section <a href="#rec-rescind">6.9</a></li>
        <li>Clarified the process for continuing work on a specification initially developed under another charter
          - sections <a href="#CharterReview">5.2.3</a>, <a href="#cfp">5.2.4</a>, <a href="#WGCharter">5.2.6</a>,
          <a href="#transition-reqs">6.2.2</a>.</li>
        <li>Changed the voting for AB and TAG elections to Single Transferable Vote
          - section <a href="AB-TAG-Elections">2.5.2</a></li>
        <li>Clarified the rights and obligations of Member Consortia and their representatives
          - section <a href="#MemberBenefits">2.1.1</a></li>
        <li>Renumber: 5.2.8 becomes 5.2.7 because there was no section 5.2.7</li>
        <li>Simplify Appeals, so they can occur whether there was dissent or not, and in a broader range of cases 
          - sections <a href="#candidate-rec">6.4</a>, <a href="#rec-publication">6.6</a>, <a href="#rec-rescind">6.9</a>,
          <a href="#ReviewAppeal">7</a>, <a href="#ACAppeal">7.2</a>, <a href="ACVotes">7.3</a>,
          <a href="#Submission">10</a>, <a href="#SubmissionNo">10.4</a>, <a href="#GAProcess">11</a></li>
      </ul>

    </main>
  </body>
</html>