W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > August 2016

Re: Obsolete vs rescinded vs superseded recommendations

From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 03:46:00 +0900
Cc: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3213DDB6-E430-4DF3-89FA-20C448C95C74@rivoal.net>
To: David Singer <singer@mac.com>

> On Aug 10, 2016, at 01:03, David Singer <singer@mac.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 8, 2016, at 21:15 , Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>> The rescinding process looks appropriate when "W3C discovers burdensome patent claims", but since rescinded documents are no longer covered by the patent policy, it is less clear that it is a good fit for recommendations that would be fine on their own, but are replaced by and are in conflict with later specifications.
> Correct.  Rescinded is for specs with actual problems (almost certainly IPR problems).
>> The process to obsolete recommendations seems somewhat more relevant for such documents, but that's not what the process document calls for.
> Oh, it was intended to cover this case.  If that’s not clear, we should make it so.

Currently it says:

  W3C may rescind a Recommendation, for example if
  the Recommendation contains many errors that conflict
  with a later version

Sounds like that should go under "W3C may obsolete a Recommendation" instead.

> I would like to keep it simple and allow Obsolete to include “superseded” (e.g. by a spec. of another name, another body, or the like).

I agree that Superseded is effectively a subcase of Obsolete. I think it could be useful to distinguish, but I don't think it is strictly required.

 - Florian
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2016 18:46:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 9 August 2016 18:46:25 UTC