W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > May 2011

[Bug 12725] Document should be on the Note-track

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 19:50:30 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QRUxS-0002hV-Cm@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12725

Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com

--- Comment #2 from Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> 2011-05-31 19:50:28 UTC ---
I do NOT believe the Normativity of a specification is necesarily the test of
whether it should be on the Recommendation track or not.  The real test for me
is if the owning WG plans to maintain the specification or not.

See Section 7.5 "Ending Work on a Technical Report":
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/process.html#tr-end 

For example the XML Schema Primer is a W3C Recommendation but obviously that
specification does not contain normative text. 

See XML Schema Primer 2nd Edition as proof that the XML Schema WG actively
maintained this specification:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-0-20041028/ 

On the other hand the WS-Policy Primer was published as a WG Note since that WG
explicitly decided it did NOT want to maintain the specification:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/NOTE-ws-policy-primer-20071112/ 

/paulc

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 19:50:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 31 May 2011 19:50:32 GMT