--- a/tr.html Tue Feb 04 21:18:23 2014 +0400
+++ b/tr.html Tue Feb 04 21:59:52 2014 +0400
@@ -52,10 +52,10 @@
<p>This is an intermediate revised draft proposal to replace the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">current
chapter 7 of the W3C process document</a> with a more effective W3C
Specification life cycle following the meeting of the W3C Advisory
- Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 3 February 2014. This document is an
- editor's draft for resolution of comments received.</p>
- <p>In this draft, there are some pointers and placeholders for changes
- expected in response to open issues, most particularly <a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/77">ISSUE-77</a>.</p>
+ Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 3 February 2014. As foreshadowed at
+ that meeting and in email to the W3Process Community Group, this draft
+ re-establishes a Proposed Recommendation phase, and clarifies the
+ requirements for revising a Candidate Recommendation.</p>
<p>This introductory session (before the chapter title below) will be
removed when this chapter is re-incorporated into the full process
document, as per issues 60-64.</p>
@@ -193,14 +193,15 @@
Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation</a></li>
</ul>
</li>
- <li><a href="#rec-modify">7.6 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</a>
+ <li> <a href="#rec-pr">7.6 Proposed Recommendation</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#rec-modify">7.7 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</a>
<ul>
- <li><a href="#errata">7.6.1 Errata Management</a></li>
- <li><a href="#revised-rec">7.6.2 Revising a Recommendation</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#errata">7.7.1 Errata Management</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#revised-rec">7.7.2 Revising a Recommendation</a></li>
</ul>
</li>
- <li><a href="#Note">7.7 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</a></li>
- <li><a href="#good-practice">7.8 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#Note">7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</a></li>
+ <li><a href="#good-practice">7.9 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</a></li>
<li><a href="#mozTocId806006">Further reading</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="rec-advance">7.1 W3C Technical Reports</h3>
@@ -246,7 +247,7 @@
</ol>
<p>
<svg xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
- viewBox="0.00 0.00 400.00 62.00" height="5em" width="36em">
+ viewBox="0.00 0.00 450.00 62.00" height="5em" width="45em">
<g transform="scale(1 1) rotate(0) translate(4 58)" class="graph" id="graph0">
<g class="node" id="wd">
<ellipse ry="18" rx="38.1938" cy="-18" cx="147" stroke="black" fill="none"></ellipse>
@@ -273,7 +274,7 @@
stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </g>
<g class="edge" id="edge4">
<path d="M242.388,-33.916C237.793,-44.1504 243.664,-54 260,-54 270.72,-54 276.934,-49.7581 278.64,-43.9494"
- stroke="black" fill="none"></path>
+ stroke="black" fill="none" stroke-dasharray="5 3"></path>
<polygon points="282.114,-43.5071 277.612,-33.916 275.15,-44.2208 282.114,-43.5071"
stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </g>
<g class="edge" id="edge5">
@@ -282,11 +283,19 @@
stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </g>
<g class="node" id="node4">
<ellipse ry="18" rx="28.6953" cy="-18" cx="363" stroke="black" fill="none"></ellipse>
- <a xlink:href="#RecsW3C"><text font-size="14.00" font-family="Times,serif"
- y="-14.3" x="363" text-anchor="middle">REC</text></a> </g>
+ <a xlink:href="#RecsPR"><text font-size="14.00" font-family="Times,serif"
+ y="-14.3" x="363" text-anchor="middle">PR</text></a> </g>
<g class="edge" id="edge6">
<path d="M297.75,-18h26.5" stroke="black" fill="none"></path>
<polygon points="324.306,-21.5001 334.306,-18 324.306,-14.5001 324.306,-21.5001"
+ stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </g>
+ <g class="node" id="node5">
+ <ellipse ry="18" rx="28.6953" cy="-18" cx="443" stroke="black" fill="none"></ellipse>
+ <a xlink:href="#RecsW3C"><text font-size="14.00" font-family="Times,serif"
+ y="-14.3" x="443" text-anchor="middle">REC</text></a> </g>
+ <g class="edge" id="edge7">
+ <path d="M391.75,-18h20.5" stroke="black" fill="none"></path>
+ <polygon points="404.306,-21.5 414.306,-18 404.306,-14.5 404.306,-21.5"
stroke="black" fill="black"></polygon> </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>
@@ -332,6 +341,13 @@
accepted as Recommendations. Announcement of a different next step <em
class="rfc2119">should</em> include the reasons why the change in
expectations comes at so late a stage.</dd>
+ <dt>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
+ which begins with Candidate Recommendation. Substantive changes <span class="rfc2119">must</span>
+ not be made to a Proposed Recommendation except by publishing a new
+ 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
@@ -645,10 +661,57 @@
Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a>
the decision to advance the technical report.</p>
<h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised Candidate Recommendation</h4>
- <h3 id="rec-publication">7.5 W3C Recommendation</h3>
- <p class="issue">A better explanation of how a document goes from Candidate
- Recommencation to Recommendation is needed here. <a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/77">ISSUE-77</a></p>
- <h4 id="for-all-recs"><a id="rec-requirements">7.5.1 For <strong>all</strong>
+ <h3 id="rec-pr">7.5 Proposed Recommendation</h3>
+ <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
+ requirements for advancement</a>,</p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the Request for
+ publication of a Proposed Recommendation to the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory
+ Committee</a>, and</li>
+ <li>The deadline for Advisory Committee review of the technical report <em
+ class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong> 28 days after
+ the publication of the Proposed Recommendation.</li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>a Working Group</p>
+ <ul>
+ <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> republish the document, identifying it
+ as the basis of a Request for Recommendation,</li>
+ <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation
+ experience</a> 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 have been <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#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,</li>
+ <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are tracked, and</li>
+ <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> remove features identified in the
+ Candidate Recommendation document as "at risk" without repeating the
+ transition to Candidate Recommendation.</li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>The Director</p>
+ <ul>
+ <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the Request for publication of
+ a Proposed Recommendation to the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory
+ Committee</a>, and</li>
+ <li>The deadline for Advisory Committee review of the technical report <em
+ class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong> 28 days after
+ the publication of the Proposed Recommendation.</li>
+ <li> <span><em class="rfc2119">should not</em> approve a Request
+ for publication of a Proposed Recommendation less than 35 days after
+ the publication of the Candidate Recommendation on which is it based
+ [editor's note - this is to allow for the patent policy exclusion
+ period to expire], and </span></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>
+ <h3 id="rec-publication">7.6 W3C Recommendation</h3>
+ <h4 id="for-all-recs"><a id="rec-requirements">7.6.1 For <strong>all</strong>
W3C Recommendations</a></h4>
<p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
requirements for advancement</a>,</p>
@@ -657,10 +720,6 @@
approval of a Request for publication of a W3C Recommendation to the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory
Committee</a>,</li>
- <li>The deadline for Advisory Committee review of the technical report <em
- class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong> 28 days after
- the announcement of provisional approval to publish the Edited
- Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation,</li>
<li>If there was any <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#def-Dissent"
rel="glossary" title="Definition of Dissent"><span class="dfn-instance">dissent</span></a>
in Advisory Committee reviews, the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
@@ -671,44 +730,7 @@
Committee</a> <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a>
the decision,</li>
<li>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication
- of a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public, and</li>
- <li>The "Status of the Document" <em class="rfc2119">must</em> reflect
- whether it is provisionally approved, or published as a W3C
- Recommendation.</li>
- </ul>
- <h4 id="lcrec-publication">7.5.2 Publishing a Candidate Recommendation as a
- W3C Recommendation</h4>
- <p>To publish a Candidate Recommendation as a W3C Recommendation, a Working
- Group</p>
- <ul>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> republish the document, identifying it
- as the basis of a Request for Recommendation,</li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation
- experience</a>,</li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the document has received <a
- href="#wide-review">wide review,</a></li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that all issues raised during the
- Candidate Recommendation review period have been <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally
- addressed</a>,</li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em>identify any substantive issues raised
- since the close of the review period by parties other than Advisory
- Committee representatives,</li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are tracked, and</li>
- <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> remove features identified in the
- Candidate Recommendation document as "at risk" without repeating the
- transition to Candidate Recommendation.</li>
- </ul>
- <p>The Director</p>
- <ul>
- <li><span><em class="rfc2119">should not</em> provisionally approve a
- Request for publication of a W3C Recommendation less than 35 days
- after the publication of the Candidate Recommendation on which is it
- based [editor's note - this is to allow for the patent policy
- exclusion period to expire], and </span></li>
- <li><span><em class="rfc2119">may</em> provisionally approve a
- Recommendation with minimal implementation experience where there is a
- compelling reason to do so. In such a case, the Director <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
- explain the reasons for that decision. </span></li>
+ of a W3C Recommendation to 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>
@@ -717,10 +739,10 @@
an Edited Recommendation</a>, or</li>
<li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-rescind">rescinded</a>.</li>
</ul>
- <h3 id="rec-modify">7.6 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</h3>
+ <h3 id="rec-modify">7.7 Modifying a W3C Recommendation</h3>
<p>The following sections discuss the management of errors and the process
for making changes to a Recommendation.</p>
- <h4 id="errata">7.6.1 Errata Management</h4>
+ <h4 id="errata">7.7.1 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
@@ -746,7 +768,7 @@
changes to interested parties, notably when corrections are proposed or
incorporated into an Edited Recommendation, according to the Team's
requirements.</p>
- <h4 id="revised-rec">7.6.2 Revising a Recommendation</h4>
+ <h4 id="revised-rec">7.7.2 Revising a Recommendation</h4>
<p>Editorial changes to a Recommendation require no technical review of the
proposed changes. A Working Group <span class="rfc2119">may</span>
request republication of a Recommendation for these classes of change, or
@@ -771,7 +793,7 @@
<p>For changes which introduces a new feature or features, W3C <span class="rfc2119">must</span>
follow the full process of <a href="#rec-advance">advancing a technical
report to Recommendation</a>.</p>
- <h3 id="Note">7.7 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</h3>
+ <h3 id="Note">7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note</h3>
<p>Working Groups and Interest Groups publish material that is not a formal
specification as Notes. This may include supporting documentation for a
specification, such as requirements, use cases, good practices and the
@@ -796,7 +818,7 @@
Policy</a> [<a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">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 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</h3>
+ <h3 id="rec-rescind">7.9 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