Added intro section to the chapter describing Rec and Note track (and Notes as parking for abandoned work). ISSUE-59
Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:12:12 +0100
changeset 61 0a4422671593
parent 60 e2e9181b2deb
child 62 6ef53b5d1efb
Added intro section to the chapter describing Rec and Note track (and Notes as parking for abandoned work). ISSUE-59
--- a/tr.html	Mon Jan 20 01:13:15 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Mon Jan 20 09:12:12 2014 +0100
@@ -194,6 +194,31 @@
       <li><a href="#mozTocId806006">Further reading</a></li>
     <h3 id="rec-advance">7.1 W3C Technical Reports</h3>
+    <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 work has been completed and the document is good enough to
+      become a new standard, there will then be a Candidate Recommendation phase
+      allowing review by the W3C membership and to formally collect
+      implementation experience to ensure it works in practice, followed by Publication
+      as a Recommendation.</p>
+    <p>Groups may also publish documents as W3C Notes. The two common purposes
+      for Notes are </p>
+    <ol>
+      <li>to document information that is not a formal technical specification,
+        such as use cases motivating a specification and best practices for its
+        use, and</li>
+      <li>to clarify the status of work that is abandoned, that there is no
+        longer interest in completing it so it should not be assumed that will
+        become a standard.</li>
+    </ol>
+    <p>Some W3C Notes are developed through successive Working Drafts, with an
+      expectation that they will become Notes, while others are simply
+      Published. There are few formal requirements to publish a document as a
+      W3C Note, and they have no standing as a recommendation of W3C but are
+      simply documents preserved for historical reference.</p>
     <h4 id="recs-and-notes">7.1.1 Recommendations and Notes</h4>
     <p>W3C follows these steps when advancing a technical report to
@@ -260,8 +285,6 @@
         Committee</a> and Working Group Chairs when a Working Group's request
       for a specification to advance in maturity level is declined and and the
       specification is returned to a Working Group for further work.</p>
-    <p class="issue">Add a short explanation of Note track, and how documents
-      can go from Rec-track to Note and back, to this section. <a href="">ISSUE-59</a></p>
     <h4 id="maturity-levels">7.1.2 Maturity Levels</h4>
       <dt id="RecsWD">Working Draft (WD)</dt>
@@ -582,8 +605,8 @@
       the decision to advance the technical report.</p>
     <h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised Candidate Recommendation</h4>
     <h3 id="rec-publication">7.5 W3C Recommendation</h3>
-    <p class="issue">A better explanation of how a document becomes a
-      Recommendation is needed here.</p>
+    <p class="issue">A better explanation of how a document goes from Candidate
+      Recommencation to Recommendation is needed here. <a href="">ISSUE-77</a></p>
     <h4 id="for-all-recs"><a id="rec-requirements">7.5.1 For <strong>all</strong>
         W3C Recommendations</a></h4>
     <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
@@ -768,7 +791,7 @@
         Policy</a> [<a href="">PUB33</a>]
       does not specify any licensing requirements or commitments for Working
       Group Notes, only for W3C Recommendations.</p>
-    <h3 id="rec-rescind">7.8 &gt;Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</h3>
+    <h3 id="rec-rescind">7.8 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</h3>
     <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> rescind a Recommendation, for example
       if the Recommendation contains many errors that conflict with a later
       version or if W3C discovers burdensome patent claims that affect