Comments on Process 101

Hi Shawn,

I think that this document is a great idea.

I like the diagram, but it raises these questions:

An LCWD can skip straight to PR without passing through PR. Under what 
conditions would this happen? Why? I can't work out the answer from 
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html

How does a document get downgraded from  e.g. PR to CR. When would this 
be from PR to WD? Again I can't work out the answer from 
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html


Regarding the rest of the doc, here are some questions for each section 
we might want to be able to answer. For the purposes of the questions I 
assume the character of someone with no involvement with W3C and is 
aggressively challenging the process -- this may or may not be an 
appropriate persona.

Working Draft (WD):
How do people give input? (Talk about interest groups, mailing lists -- 
be specific, give urls for signing up)

Last Call Working Draft (LCWD):
Who decides who sits on a Working Group? What is their authority to do 
so? Why do they get to decide this stuff? Why can't I?

Candidate Recommendation (CR):
How is this 'implementation experience' gathered? Where can we see this 
data? How to I make my experiences while implementing my website known 
to you -- and the obstacles caused by your dumb 
explanation/spelling/definition/document-title/requirement/prose-style/British-humour?

Proposed Recommendation (PR):
Who reviews it? What makes them think they know. Who are the W3C 
members? How come they get a voice and I/my organisation/my friends don't?

W3C Recommendation (Web Standard):
How do you define 'significant support from the public'. Prove it. I 
don't support it and nor do my friends. How do we complain?
Similar to standards? How. What is dissimilar? Why don't you just call 
them standards? Where can I get some actual standards?

Kind regards

Liam
www.communis.co.uk