FYI: Summary of resources updated for 1 August 2014 Process

I think in the case of DAP it is probably simpler to stick to the older process - not sure there would be much benefit of changing for what is already in progress, at this point.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
Chair DAP
@fjhirsch



Begin forwarded message:

> Resent-From: spec-prod@w3.org
> From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
> Subject: Summary of resources updated for 1 August 2014 Process
> Date: August 5, 2014 at 2:19:36 PM EDT
> To: "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
> 
> Dear spec-prod subscribers,
> 
> Today we announced the 1 August 2014 Process Document [1], which makes
> changes to the Recommendation Track [2].
> 
> All groups are now operating under the new Process, but for two years
> starting 2 September 2014, existing groups may publish specifications
> under either the old or the new Process. We've prepared a FAQ [3]
> about the new Process and transition.
> 
> Below I've listed the primary resources that we have updated (or have
> nearly finished updating) for publications under the new
> Process. Because of the 2-year transition period, there will be two
> sets of tools in some cases (pubrules, transitions).
> 
> We've done our best to update links to resources from the Guidebook
> and other places; we'll continue to update links as we spot them and
> welcome your bug reports.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Ian
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#Reports
> [3] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ProcessTransition2014
> 
> ================
> Pubrules
> 
> We added a new requirement for a one-sentence paragraph in the status
> section that identifies the governing process. (We already have such a
> sentence for the governing Patent Policy.)
> 
> This paragraph will be mandatory in all publications that happen after
> 2 September, whether the specifications are published under the "old"
> or "new" process.
> 
> We have made two additional rule changes:
> 
> * The requirement to express a "minimal duration" has been replaced
>   by a requirement to include a review end date. That is because
>   Last Call and CR have merged under the new process.
> * The rule suggesting to include an estimated date by which time the
>   Working Group expects to have sufficient implementation experience
>   has been removed.
> 
> ================
> Pubrules checker
> 
> The checker has been updated for those changes:
> http://w3.org/Guide/pubrules
> 
> ================
> Transitions documentation
> 
> The transitions document has been overhauled to reflect the more
> concise requirements of the new Process. 
> 
> For the description of transitions governed by the new process, see:
>  http://w3.org/Guide/transitions2014
> 
> For the description of transitions governed by the old process, see
> the unchanged:
>  http://w3.org/Guide/transitions
> 
> ================
> Respec
> 
> I have requested [4] a respec feature to make it easy to fulfill the 
> new pubrules requirement.
> 
> [4] https://github.com/darobin/respec/issues/324
> 
> ================
> Invited Expert policy
> 
> New version for people who join groups as of today:
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2014/08-invited-expert.html
> 
> It is unchanged from the previous version except for updated links to the
> new Process Document.
> 
> ================
> Register an Internet Media Type for a W3C Spec
> 
> Updated: 
> http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype2014.html
> 
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 7 August 2014 14:19:20 UTC