W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > October 2013

Re: New Editor's draft of Chapter 7

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:33:36 +0200
To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, "Stephen Zilles" <szilles@adobe.com>
Message-ID: <op.w4k9eaoby3oazb@chaals.local>
On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 07:13:25 +0200, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>  
wrote:

> Charles,
> A couple of small points.

Note that unless someone screams, these will all appear in the next  
editor's draft, sometime this week.

> 1. Implementation Experience.
> You added, " As creating, reviewing, and running tests can be very  
> time-consuming, Working Groups are often able to work more effectively  
> if they plan their test development work early in the development  
> process."
>
> We have long held that tests are not necessarily required and that the  
> criteria is demonstration of (interoperable) implementations. For this,  
> tests are one way to go, but not necessarily the only way. So I suggest  
> that you change your sentence to, " Planning and accomplishing a  
> demonstration of (interoperable) implementations can be very time  
> consuming. Groups are often able to work more effectively if they plan  
> how they will demonstrate interoperable implementations early in the  
> development process; for example, they may wish to develop tests in  
> concert with implementation efforts."

Sure. (Since I don't think that sentence matters, it would be silly to  
suggest I care that what is in it matters :) ).

> 2. In bullet 3 of 7.2, the word "change" should occur after  
> "substantive" in the first sentence.

Yep.

> 3. I am a bit confused about the subsection of 7.4.5 on "edited  
> Recommendations". This section list as a "SHOULD" that the Working  
> Group, " SHOULD document known implementation.", but this is one of the  
> General Requirements of 7.2. Does this mean that the General  
> Requirements do not apply or should this requirement be removed in favor  
> of the General Requirements (which seem to be required for "all W3C  
> Recommendations" per the next paragraph.

It should be removed - it's just an editorial error. Thanks for catching  
it.

cheers

Chaals

> Steve Z.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:24 PM
> To: public-w3process@w3.org
> Subject: New Editor's draft of Chapter 7
>
> Hi folks, as always the latest draft is at  
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html
>
> Changes:
> - email thread starting at
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Sep/0018.html>
> editorial stuff
> - clarified up requirements for an Edited Recommendation
> - simplified errata, so making normative changes doesn't have a possible  
> parallel process any more.
> - added a sentence to the implementation experience section, advising  
> people to plan early.
>
> There are currently 7 issues pending review  
> <https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/pendingreview> (i.e.
> I believe the draft addresses them) and none which have not been  
> addressed.
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>        chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 14:34:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:09 UTC