[Bug 12776] Define process for deciding whether a draft is REC-track or Note-track

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12776

--- Comment #10 from Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> 2011-06-01 13:29:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8 from Sam)
> > Until or unless the following bugs are resolved, we still need a process for
> > deciding whether a given document is REC-track or Note-track:
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12725
> > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12726
> ...
> What the W3C publication policy does instead provide for is making it clear
> within the draft itself that it is an informative-only draft (if that's what
> the group agrees it is to be). So the right thing to be discussing and getting
> resolved here is an HTML WG policy for the group to decide whether a particular
> draft is informative-only or not.

As an example of the kind of text that Mike is referring to, the following is
the first sentence of the Abstract from the XML Schema Part 0: Primer which
makes it very clear that the W3C Recommendation is "non-normative":
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-0-20041028/

Abstract
XML Schema Part 0: Primer is a non-normative document intended to provide an
easily readable description of the XML Schema facilities, and is oriented
towards quickly understanding how to create schemas using the XML Schema
language.

/paulc

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2011 13:29:57 UTC