W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2002

Re: XML Events maturity level

From: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 11:34:42 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20020814.113442.74729474.mimasa@w3.org>
To: Art.Barstow@nokia.com
Cc: www-html@w3.org

Art.Barstow@nokia.com wrote:

> Sorry for the boring process question but I'm trying to understand the
> "maturity level" of XML Events per the W3C's Process Document:
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/tr.html#Reports

I did expect you would come up with this question in some forum or another.

> [[
> The Working Group expects that this document will soon move into Candidate 
> Recommendation status.
> ]]
> My interpretation of [1] is that a WD's next higher maturity level is a
> LC WD but not a CR.  So, what is the meaning of "soon" in the  above quote?  
> Does it mean after another LC WD or does the WG expect the next publication
> of XML Events to be a CR?

The latter is the WG's expectation.  My interpretation of [1] is that
a Recommendation-track technical report must go through Last Call
review before advancing to CR, but it doesn't say a WG must keep
silent before requesting the CR status.

The WG considers we have addressed Last Call comments and we do expect
to advance this specification to CR, but you know, many people are
on vacation now and we have difficulty to organize a CR review call
with the Director.   For various reasons it took long time since
we published a Last Call WD, and we thought it's rather silly to
keep public uninformed while we are waiting those people to come back
from vacation.  That's why we published an intermediate WD to let
people know what's going on.

XML Schema did the same, it went to Last Call:


and published an intermediate WD to let public know what's going to change:


then went to CR:


It comes down to whether

  - we should keep silent to make Process happy, or
  - we should keep public informed

and we consider the latter has greater value.  It's easier for us
to go for the former, or we could work-around the process question 
by not publishing this document as a TR (e.g. post this docuemnt to
this mailing list and pretend that it's not a new WD), but I don't
think those are better ways.

If you consider our practice is against the spirit of the W3C Process,
you may raise the issue to the Advisory Committee.

Masayasu Ishikawa / mimasa@w3.org
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium
HTML Activity Lead, Team Contact for the HTML Working Group
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2002 22:34:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:00 UTC