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

html5/decision-policy decision-policy-v2.html,1.25,1.26

From: Maciej Stachowiak via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 00:25:14 +0000
To: public-html-commits@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QQqIE-0001de-2d@lionel-hutz.w3.org>
Update of /sources/public/html5/decision-policy
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv6270

Modified Files:
	decision-policy-v2.html 
Log Message:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12811
The Decision Policy should give an overview of the policies it defines


Index: decision-policy-v2.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v2.html,v
retrieving revision 1.25
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -u -d -r1.25 -r1.26
--- decision-policy-v2.html	29 May 2011 23:01:01 -0000	1.25
+++ decision-policy-v2.html	30 May 2011 00:25:12 -0000	1.26
@@ -12,6 +12,14 @@
 #bug-resolutions, #bug-resolutions td, #bug-resolutions th { 
     border: 2px solid black; 
     border-collapse: collapse }
+#toc {
+    list-style: none;
+}
+#toc > li > a {
+     font-size: 110%;
+     color: #005A9C;
+}
+
 </style>
 </head>
 <body>
@@ -19,7 +27,7 @@
 <h1>HTML Working Group Decision Policy</h1>
 
 <section>
-<h2>Introduction</h2>
+<h2>1. Introduction</h2>
 
 <p>For products of the HTML Working Group, particularly HTML5, we expect a high volume of Last Call comments. We expect most comments can be resolved in a satisfactory way by the editor of the affected draft. However, there are a few reasons we need to formalize our process a little bit. First, we are required by W3C Process to track and formally respond to all Last Call comments, and to produce a disposition of comments document in order to exit Last Call. Second, some comments will not be satisfactory as initially fielded by the editor, and will need to be resolved by a decision of the Working Group. Third, it needs to be very clear to commenters how to get their input formally considered.</p>
 
@@ -28,7 +36,34 @@
 not joining the group will be considered by the Chairs on a
 case-by-case basis.</p>
 
-<p>While the primary purpose of this process is for Last Call, we'd like to start on the process of migrating the Working Group over to the process right away. We've already informally been asking commenters to follow some of these steps.</p>
+</section>
+
+<section>
+<h2>2. Policies Defined in this Document</h2>
+
+<p>This document defines a number of policies in use by the HTML Working Group. Here is a brief description of each.</p>
+
+<ul id=toc>
+
+<li><a href="#overview">3. Overview of Comment Processing</a> - Summary of how to submit and track comments to the HTML WG.</li>
+<li><a href="#basic">4. Basic Process</a> - The bugzilla-based process by which feedback is initially submitted and considered by Editors.</li>
+<li><a href="#escalation">5. Escalation Process</a> - The tracker-based process by which commenters can escalate issues for consideration by the full Working Group.</li>
+<li><a href="#cp-review-process">6. Change Proposal Review Process</a> - The process by which Chairs review Change Proposals.</li>
+<li><a href="#lc-review">7. Last Call and Pre-Last Call Review Process</a> - The meta-process by which the Group drives an LC or Pre-LC Review.</li>
+<li><a href="#reopening">8. Requests for a Decision to be Reopened Based on New Information</a> - The process by which Working Group members may ask to have a decision reopened, if they believe they have relevant new information.</li>
+
+</ul>
+
+
+</section>
+
+<section>
+<h2 id=overview>3. Overview of Comment Processing</h2>
+
+<p>While the primary purpose of this process is for Last Call, we'd
+like to start on the process of migrating the Working Group over to
+the process right away. We've already informally been asking
+commenters to follow some of these steps.</p>
 
 <p>The way we will make decisions involves two subprocesses:
 the <a href="#basic">Basic Process</a> and
@@ -72,7 +107,7 @@
 </section>
 
 <section>
-<h2 id="basic">Basic Process</h2>
+<h2 id="basic">4. Basic Process</h2>
 
 <p>The Basic Process describes the overall handling of an issue; we
 believe most steps can be handled without close involvement of the
@@ -319,7 +354,7 @@
 
 <section>
 
-<h2 id="escalation">Escalation Process</h2>
+<h2 id="escalation">5. Escalation Process</h2>
 
 <p>Some issues cannot be settled solely through the Basic Process. In
 such cases, a party to the dispute will request escalation to
@@ -504,7 +539,7 @@
 
 
 <section>
-<h2 id="cp-review-process">Change Proposal Review Process</h2>
+<h2 id="cp-review-process">6. Change Proposal Review Process</h2>
 
 <p>The Change Proposal Review Process describes how the Chairs review
 Change Proposals to ensure that they meet the basic requirements to be
@@ -559,7 +594,7 @@
 </section>
 
 <section>
-<h2 id="lc-review">Last Call and Pre-Last Call Review Process</h2>
+<h2 id="lc-review">7. Last Call and Pre-Last Call Review Process</h2>
 
 <p>Eventually, drafts become mature enough that they are ready to
 advance through the W3C Process. Given that drafts may see an ongoing
@@ -681,7 +716,7 @@
 </section>
 
 <section>
-<h2 id="reopening">Requests for a Decision to be Reopened Based on New Information</h2>
+<h2 id="reopening">8. Requests for a Decision to be Reopened Based on New Information</h2>
 
 <p>Occasionally, after a Working Group Decision is rendered, a WG
 Member may identify new information relevant to the decision which,
Received on Monday, 30 May 2011 00:25:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 May 2011 00:25:22 GMT