Re: Review of Process 2020

On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 11:54:58PM -0500, fantasai wrote:
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMDF_(E-book_format)) ), if you're looking for
> > > Ever-something. :)
> > 
> > We won't really always only extend, I suppose (the process already had
> > whatever was needed to do that, in fact).
> 
> It did not. To add features to a specification, it was required to issue a
> FPWD. See https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#revised-rec

Indeed, but it was possible to lead to a new REC with new features while
keeping existing REC content. This new process is just making it a bit shorter 
(presumably), with the risk of being in CR forever (that already
happens anyway).

> > The real addition of Process2020 is that some CRs with substantial changes
> > will be non-CfE-triggering. "Draft" seemed a good word to describe
> > the unfinished state of those. "CR Update" is way too loose, it seems
> > it could apply to anything published as CR (CfE-triggering, editorial or
> > draft).
> 
> Happy to switch it to CR Draft. Done.

Thx

> > Maybe I'm just too pessimistic on the possibility to get the PP changed
> > in a timely manner, but I doubt it will be changed before this process
> > version.
> 
> Sure, and in that case we can remove the section. :)
> 
> ~fantasai
> who is trying to be prepared for optimism as well as pessimism
 
At risk features are so useful ;)

Received on Thursday, 5 December 2019 08:00:53 UTC