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

Re: H:TML draft for FPWD consideration

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:53:07 -0800
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <26A79647-D083-461B-A938-9783C1527524@apple.com>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>

On Feb 3, 2010, at 3:39 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

> 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.

There's a couple of options (according to people in the know on this):

- Just go to Note at some point by WG Decision.
- Go to Last Call followed by Note. This gives a bit more opportunity for wider review.
- Go through the full process to non-normative REC. This invokes official Team and Member decision points.

I think the best option for a document of this type is probably the middle option. Soliciting technical review beyond the WG is really valuable, but I don't see a lot of benefit to the CR/PR/REC formalities.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 11:53:42 GMT

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