- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:34:57 +0200
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org
Hi Art, Thanks for your comments. I register your comments in our last call tracking system. See inline. Arthur Barstow wrote: > Re Status of the Document (SotD) section: given this document is purely > non-normative, why is this document "expected to become a W3C > Recommendation" rather than a Working Group note? For example, how would > this document ever be able to meet the following entrance criteria for > Proposed Recommendation: > > [[ > http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfr > > 2. Shown that each feature of the technical report has been implemented. > ]] There is no a priori contradiction. The Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 Recommendation [1] is also an informative-only Recommendation for instance. Primers are usually informative Recommendations as well. Main differences between a normative Rec and an informative Rec are: - that there is no notion of conformance claim for an informative Recommendation, e.g. one cannot claim conformance to the Mobile Web Best Practices (one may only claim conformance to the W3C mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0 normative Recommendation [2] that relies on the Mobile Web Best Practices though). - that the licensing requirements of the patent policy do not apply, see: http://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq.html#informative That does not prevent "implementations", i.e. one can follow the Mobile Web Application Best Practices. An informative Rec follows the usual rules of the process document as any other Rec, and in particular periods where the Web community is invited to review the document to ensure quality. This would not necessarily be the case with a Working Group Note. > > Re the use of "Non-Normative" in the titles of Appendix A and B: given > the SotD clearly states the document is non-normative, it seems a bit > redundant to restate it in the titles [hint: delete "(Non-Normative)". Good point. (I note your point actually also applies to the appendices of the published Mobile Web Best Practices Recommendation as well). Thanks, Francois. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-mobile-bp-20080729/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20081208/
Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 07:35:27 UTC