W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: WG comments, Working Drafts, and Last Call -- clarification please?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:20:42 -0400
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Shelley Powers" <shelley.just@gmail.com>, "HTMLWG WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.ux89csmjwxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:45:14 -0400, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
wrote:

> Here's my understanding:
>
> - By Last Call, a Working Group is expected to have resolved all
> serious issues within the Working Group. In practice this doesn't
> always happen.

But when it doesn't, it's pretty likely that the Last Call won't be a last  
one. So good editors don't propose specs if they are not ready, and  
sensible working groups don't go to last call if they can't get a  
reasonable level of agreement from the group.

> - It would be out of order for a Working Group member to attempt to
> reopen an issue that has been resolved by actual Working Group
> decision, if they don't have new information to provide. Not because
> it's Last Call, but because WG decisions can only be reopened based on
> new information.
> - Last Call is an appropriate time to register Formal Objections, even
> from WG members. Technically, Formal Objections don't even really mean
> anything before LC.

So if a WG member has accepted something "pro tempore" (for the moment, in  
the interests of moving forward) it is wise to note that this might not  
mean accepting it as good enough for last call.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 19:21:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:50 UTC