W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2009

Re: ACTION-95, ISSUE-65: Plan to publish a new WD of HTML-5

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:01:40 -0800
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <053BE6BD-2D5B-4772-9D51-CB00A0F8CD35@apple.com>
To: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>

On Jan 29, 2009, at 3:29 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:

> Le 29 janv. 2009 à 18:13, Boris Zbarsky a écrit :
>> Robin Berjon wrote:
>>> In the spirit of tiptoeing around the situation some more, I'd  
>>> like to point out that Working Drafts are NEVER normative. Only  
>>> Recommendations are.
>> While true, a Working Draft is ipso facto something that is  
>> intended to become a Recommendation if it gathers consensus.
> no. And here I hope you can trust me on this, I have been involved  
> in far too many transitions calls and specs reviews.
>     Working Drafts no longer in development
>     These Working Drafts have either been dropped as work items or
>     have been incorporated into other documents. The latest version
>     of each of these documents should be an epilogue for the
>     document. The status section of the epilogue explains why the
>     work was discontinued or where the document was incorporated.
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/#WD-stop
> Editors Draft were usually not really visible but really the draft  
> to put ideas, noodling with editing, etc. Working Draft is to make a  
> snapshot of this editing ideas, with a stable date, so people can  
> review, make comments, raise issues. The thing which makes me  
> uncomfortable in this discussion is that we are moving targets  
> again, editors draft being used as what is a working draft.
> Working Draft is an experiment until it reaches Last Call.
> Editor Draft is for the *editor(s)*

Earlier, the Process Document says:

"In general, Working Groups embark on this journey with the intent of  
publishing one or more Recommendations. However, W3C may end work on a  
technical report at any time, or may require a Working Group to  
conduct further work, possibly repeating one or more steps."

As I understand it, a Working Draft signals the intent to proceed  
along the Recommendation track, and the section you quoted describes  
what happens if for whatever reason the Working Draft is taken off  
that path. So what Boris said matches my understanding.

I also see little evidence that a Working Draft sees wider, better or  
more thorough review than an Editor's Draft. In the case of HTML5,  
most feedback has been directly against the Editor's Draft, so far as  
I can see.

Received on Friday, 30 January 2009 00:02:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:42 UTC