FYI: How does editing of our working drafts take place?

Hi Team,



Based on discussions on the mailing list, we've discussed the procedure 
for editing documents. This should not be new, but may clarify confusion 
about our approach towards editing our working drafts:


- Editors can and do incorporate text into drafts prior to consensus. 
This happens in both drafts. It is a highly useful practice to mark 
these areas as options, so we clearly see where we are not at consensus.

- Changes should not appear to have been "slipped in" by editors. If you 
see changes that are surprising, please follow-up and ask; these are not 
attempts to set policy or be covert.

- To improve transparency, feel free to subscribe to the 
public-tracking-commits list, which provides diffs of every edits along 
with a summary message from the editor of changes. Editors can also 
summarize major changes on the public-tracking list or walk through 
changes on calls.

- When the WG makes a decision, the chairs will direct the editors to 
make that change in the draft. The chairs and editors are responsible 
for accurately translating those decisions into the drafts; if you see a 
discrepancy or had a different interpretation of a decision, please 
raise it on the mailing list.

- When the WG disagrees with changes that have been introduced to a 
draft, the editors should remove text while we discuss.


I hope this clarifies any potential confusion and allows us to continue 
our work in a text-based and efficient manner.
If you have feedback or questions, do not hesitate to ask!



Regards,
matthias

Received on Monday, 27 August 2012 09:02:30 UTC