- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 09:50:57 +0100
- To: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Cc: Device APIs Working Group <public-device-apis@w3.org>, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com" <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
On Tuesday, October 8, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Kostiainen, Anssi wrote: > * Publish NOTEs of all the above on /TR Please do this + add the note saying it's done. The whole pretending that something is "shelved" (rather than just saying "um, no one wants this || this is too hard || this is mostly crap") is not really helpful - and, as politically correct as the shelving idea was, this is a consequence of not taking firm action and killing specs. > * Redirect /TR/shortnames to the EDs (if allowed process-wise?) This is "the dream" … won't happen just yet :) > As this is a generic issue, I'd like to ask the Chair to clarify how to resolve this. Also, has there been a W3C-wide decision on this? Charles is working on rewriting/simplifying the W3C Process document. There will be some big announcements about that at TPAC I think. CC'd Charles for more info. > On a related note, I noticed the TR index page (http://www.w3.org/TR/) has been updated recently (as announced at [1]) to include links to Nightly Drafts (aka Editor's Drafts). While this is a good improvement, it does not solve the issue of http://www.w3.org/TR/shortname pointing to obsolete versions. > I think the W3C is getting closer to fixing this - but I agree that the nightly thing is not good enough. WGs should have a choice to treat each step in the process as a "phase" (then the spec can be treated as "living", but also be appropriately marked as "WD" or "CR" - then the Chair and Team contact's role is to make sure Editors don't violate the process during these phases by, for example, reviewing all PRs during IPR-critical phases). Anyhooo…
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2013 08:51:31 UTC