deprecation and 1st version

I had an action item to clarify the deprecation Requirement [1], that 
deprecation can even apply to the first standardized version of a 
specification.  Specifically, I was supposed to invent a Technique for it.

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2005/05/qaframe-spec/#deprecated-feature-principle

The subject language currently reads:  "If the specified technology has 
already been published in a previous version of the specification, indicate 
the features from the previous version now deprecated or state in the 
conformance section that no features were deprecated."

First problem.  I think it would be very awkward to force the idea into a 
technique.  It is really a clarification of the meaning of deprecation.  If 
someone else wants to try to write it as a technique, by all means give it 
a try.

Second problem.  The definition of a specification [2] is so vague (or 
rather, "general", I guess) that it already encompasses the 
principle:  "Specification:  Document that prescribes requirements to be 
fulfilled by a product, process, or service."  That definition clearly 
allows a specification to be the 1st version of a Rec. for example, as well 
as a document that describes its precursor de-facto industry practice, for 
example.

However, like the commentors (Chris & Jeremy), I think a casual reading 
obscures the principle.  Therefore I still think it should be clarified 
(especially since we responded to them that we would do so.)

Option 1:  Add this 2nd clarifying sentence to "what does it mean":

Note that "previous version of a @@specification@@" can apply, in the case 
of W3C Recommendations for example, to features from an established 
precursor document or technology that were inherited into the first version 
of the Recommendation.

Option 2:  Add an Example (e.g., Jeremy's OWL 1st version deprecating 
OIL+DAML [2]).  Preface the example with, "Although unusual, the first 
standardized version of a specification (e.g., a Recommendation) can 
deprecate features that were inherited from precursor non-standardized 
documents or technologies, as was the case of @@OWL deprecating features 
inherited from DAML+OIL@@."

Given our apparent preference to keep "What does it mean" brief, I guess 
Option 2 might satisfy more of us.

-Lofton.

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Jan/0018, which says:
>Although, for example OWL, in its first version, does provide:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/#appD
>"Changes from DAML+OIL"
>which does identify features deprecated from the member submission 
>DAML+OIL from which OWL evolved.