W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > June 2011

[Bug 12776] Define process for deciding whether a draft is REC-track or Note-track

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:42:18 +0000
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QRkkc-00009j-7s@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12776

--- Comment #8 from Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> 2011-06-01 12:42:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> 
> So I would suggest that instead of adding anything to the HTML WG
> decision-policy doc to "Define process for deciding whether a draft is
> REC-track or Note-track", what should instead be added is "Define process for
> deciding whether a draft should contain any normative requirements".

tl;dr version: that's a separate bug.

Until or unless the following bugs are resolved, we still need a process for
deciding whether a given document is REC-track or Note-track:

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12725
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12726

Additionally, there are the following Formal Objections that we need to
resolve:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011May/0050.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011May/0051.html

(where the above mentioned bugs were entered as a result of tracking these
FOs).

Even if the bugs are resolved, unless the FOs are withdrawn it makes sense to
document the process by which the working group determined which track it was
pursuing for any given document.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2011 12:42:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:40 GMT