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

Re: Obsoleting

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 12:19:44 -0700
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-id: <E5DA07A0-9D55-4B48-B96B-38E3D05CD964@apple.com>
To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>

> 
> well, the version that has one section for both rescinding and obsoleting doesn’t add so much,  and it fixes a number of bugs in the Rescind process at the time (not that we ever use it). But agreed, it still seems awfully heavy and formal.
> 
> SZ: It should not be easier to retire a REC than to create it.

fair enough. and absent the safety-valves, this is not so bad.

> 
> New versions attached, dealing with comments received.
> 
> a) clarify that the group has to *agree* to the request when an individual makes a request of the WG or TAG
> b) clarify that the Director doesn’t just announce, but also starts a formal review.
> 
> SZ: My request was to have an announcement of the receipt of a request to retire a specification so that people can tell that the clock has started for action on the request and can send comments to the body that is responding to that request. This is where wide review takes place. Doing that at the time of the AC Review is too late to be useful and could lead to wasted AC Reviews.

Ah, so we should ask the TAG/WG to ensure that their consideration has had wide review?  Then I would suggest that we not require the public wide review at the AC approval stage. Indeed, I’d split it, instead of

> The Director must announce the proposal to retire a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups using at least the mailing list for all chairs, the public, and by starting an Advisory Committee review. The announcement:
> •       must include the rationale for retiring the Recommendation;
> •       should document known implementation;
> •       must indicate that this is a Proposal to Rescind, or a proposal to Obsolete, a Recommendation;
> •       must specify the deadline for review comments, which must be at least four weeks after announcing the proposal;
> •       must identify known dependencies and solicit review from all dependent Working Groups;
> •       must solicit public review.

say

The initiator (WG, TAG, Director, the portion of the AC, or the individual) must announce the proposal to retire a W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups using at least the mailing list for all chairs, and any known dependent groups, and the public, such that it has wide review. The announcement:
•       must indicate that this is a Proposal to Rescind, or a proposal to Obsolete, a Recommendation;
•       must include the rationale for retiring the Recommendation;
•       must specify the deadline for review comments, which must be at least four weeks after announcing the proposal;
•       must identify known dependencies;
•       should document known implementation.

If the initiator decides to proceed after this wide review, the Director starts an Advisory Committee review. That review must include consideration of the results of the wide review above.

* * *

would that be agreeable? It’s more complex again…

My suspicion is that doing this in one step, formally, is fine, as long as people are sensible and don’t bring things forward without having done informal research.  I.e. the point of the process is to catch errors and omissions, not to guide people through what it means to be sensible.

> I also assume that this
> 
> Once W3C has published a Rescinded Recommendation, future W3C technical reports must not include normative references to that technical report.
> 
> is a typo for
> 
> Once W3C has published a Rescinded Recommendation, future W3C technical reports must not include normative references to it. [[i.e. to the Recommendation]]
> 
> SZ: Instead of "it" why not say "that retired Recommendation". I believe Technical Report was used because that includes all the REC TRACK document types.

But we’re talking about a Recommendation…but sure, we could use the noun instead of pronoun.


David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2016 19:20:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 12 May 2016 19:20:14 UTC