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

Name of Last Call Candidate Recommendation Re: New draft of Chapter 7 Process proposal

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 02:22:47 +0200
Cc: "Jeff Jaffe" <jeff@w3.org>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
To: "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.w46dz9k0y3oazb@chaals.local>
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013 01:39:51 +0200, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2013, at 6:14 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 18, 2013, at 7:12 , Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>>> On 10/17/2013 9:44 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
...
>>>> Finally, Ivan Herman points out that the name Last Call Candidate  
>>>> Recommendation is horrid. I agree, but think we need "Last Call" in  
>>>> the title to help us clarify that it is the stage referred to in the  
>>>> Patent Policy as "Last Call". Anyone have a good idea for this?
>>>
>>> How about "Last Call"?
>>
>> Neat, I wonder where you thought that!
>>
>> I think the process should give a name to a document that the WG thinks  
>> is 'done' and wants formal public review on, even if nothing is tied to  
>> it.  How about PR (Public Review)?  Otherwise, neither the WG nor the  
>> public know when a public WD is 'complete'.
>
> I make some similar suggestions here:
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Oct/0066.html
>
> Namely:
>
>  * Mature Draft                   (This conveys info about the maturity)
>  * External Review Draft    (This conveys the action we want done, and  
> that we are looking beyond the WG)
>  * RIPE Draft. This stands for: Review and Implementation, Particularly  
> Externally! :)

I'm big on "Last Call". One of the ideas was to make Last Calls actually
mean "As far as we can tell, we're done", as opposed to "please have a
look".

I would also like to keep the words 'Last Call' because they have an
important meaning in the Patent Policy, and keeping that link clear in
both directions seems useful, until we can change the Patent Policy.

Beyond that, my major goal is not to lose too much time on discussion of  
this question.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
         chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Saturday, 19 October 2013 00:23:21 UTC

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