As I see it, documents published in the process of developing and maintaining evergreen recommendations take part in two chains: 1. the REC chain, i.e. REC1, REC2, REC3 2. the development chain, i.e. RECx comes about through WD1, WD2, .., CR, PR, REC Both chains need to be reflected in a very clear way in the document metadata of every document in either chain. In the REC chain there are several possible relationships between subsequent RECs: - the new REC is backward compatible with the old REC - the new REC is not backward compatible with the old REC (in which case, maybe the old REC is the end of its chain, and the new REC starts a new chain?) - the old REC is 'wrong' in some way and must be withdrawn or deprecated - maybe more? These relationships could maybe be expressed with a controlled status vocabulary: under development, completed, superseded, deprecated, withdrawn etc. How can we develop such a policy? -- GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1177#issuecomment-563969448 using your GitHub accountReceived on Tuesday, 10 December 2019 10:28:55 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:34 UTC