- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:24:44 -0500
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "webreq@w3.org" <webreq@w3.org>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 3 Aug 2011, at 4:07 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:52:22 +0200, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote: >> If we really want to rescind a Recommendation, we should do that through the process defined for that. If we want to update people on where to find more recent information (but still the current specification is still valid for some cases) then we can probably add a status update. > > So I misread the process. It seems to be come down to telling the W3C about significant issues, which I have done. What else is there in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#rec-rescind that I missed? The Advisory Board, based on input from various groups, put in a 4-week review process so that people could say "Yes, please do!" or "No, please don't for the following reasons..." The steps are, roughly: 1) Someone asks the Director to rescind. 2) The Director announces a 4-week AC + public review 3) The Director reviews the data and there's a decision either way. The question is: who gets to ask the Director. I think the case would be made most strongly by a Working Group, especially if that Working Group is the one that published the spec to begin with. Which is the best WG to make this request to the Director? Ian -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 21:24:45 UTC