- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:53:07 -0800
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Feb 3, 2010, at 3:39 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: >> Henri Sivonen wrote: >>> I'm curious, though: Is the document meant for the REC track (like >>> some previous Primer documents from other WGs) or is it targeted to >>> become a Working Group Note? >> >> I see that as a group decision. Do you have a recommendation? > > Going through the process to get to REC is useful for normative documents that can be implemented and demonstrate that with at least 2 interoperable implementations. There is no benefit to be gained from taking a non-normative document to REC, and only adds unnecessary process overhead. It's far easier to take non-normative documents to NOTE instead. There's a couple of options (according to people in the know on this): - Just go to Note at some point by WG Decision. - Go to Last Call followed by Note. This gives a bit more opportunity for wider review. - Go through the full process to non-normative REC. This invokes official Team and Member decision points. I think the best option for a document of this type is probably the middle option. Soliciting technical review beyond the WG is really valuable, but I don't see a lot of benefit to the CR/PR/REC formalities. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 11:53:42 UTC