Re: Public Permissive proposed CR exit criteria (was Re: CR exit criteria and features at risk for HTML5)

On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 00:20:18 +0200, Glenn Adams <> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <> wrote:
>> Based on the discussion so far, I think most of the WG would support the
>> following "Public Permissive" criteria. These allow a permissive  
>> definition of interoperability, like the previous "Permissive" version,
>> but require all interoperability claims to be based on public,
>> non-experimental versions, as with the previous "Strict" version.

> Since this is very close to what has been used in practice by WGs, except
> for the weakened requirement on TS  existence at exit time, I wonder if
> there should be an additional, forward-looking requirement on the WG that
> counterbalances the weakened TS req: namely, that the WG should
> (eventually, within some documented period of time) publish a TS as a
> deliverable even though it may come after PR/REC?

This is effectively a charter requirement, not something that can be  
imposed by CR exit criteria (in pat because in that context it cannot be  
more than a statement of wishing that something might happen in the  
future, with no binding power).

> I ask this because an adoption of the permissive process may be deemed as
> permission/agreement to NOT publish a TS at all (or ever)!

Yeah, I agree that the work on testing matters and should continue beyond  
the simple goal of getting through CR.



Chaals - standards declaimer

Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 17:55:30 UTC