W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > May 2011

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

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 12:35:37 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QROAb-00084b-KS@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12776

--- Comment #3 from Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> 2011-05-31 12:35:37 UTC ---
Perhaps there should be some clearer guidelines to help editors decide whether
their work should be Rec or Note?  I'd say any draft which is only meant to
provide guidance for a select community, such as authors, should be note.  Any
draft intended to describe an authoring language profile, by reference to the
normative requirements of another spec, should be note. Any draft that does not
intend to provide any normative implementation requirements should be note.

Conversely, any draft that seeks to define normative requirements for features,
which are not also normatively defined in another spec from this group, should
be rec.

Guidelines like these would mean that drafts like the polyglot guidlines, alt
text guidelines, markup language reference or authoring reference/guides should
be note.  However, specs like 2D Canvas, Microdata, HTML+RDFa, etc. would be on
the Rec track.

-- 
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 Tuesday, 31 May 2011 12:35:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:10 UTC