W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: H:TML draft for FPWD consideration

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:39:24 +0100
Message-ID: <4B69606C.9030809@lachy.id.au>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> I'm curious, though: Is the document meant for the REC track (like
>> some previous Primer documents from other WGs) or is it targeted to
>> become a Working Group Note?
>
> I see that as a group decision. Do you have a recommendation?

Going through the process to get to REC is useful for normative 
documents that can be implemented and demonstrate that with at least 2 
interoperable implementations.  There is no benefit to be gained from 
taking a non-normative document to REC, and only adds unnecessary 
process overhead.  It's far easier to take non-normative documents to 
NOTE instead.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 11:39:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:01 GMT