W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Microdata REC rationale statement discussion

From: Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:08:49 +0900
To: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>
Cc: msporny@digitalbazaar.com, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20121211020848.GE51859@sideshowbarker>
Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, 2012-12-10 10:11 -0800:

> Hi Manu,
> [...]
> The rationale document states:
> >> The W3C Process defines a REC track along which Working Groups
> >> actively develop deliverables. If a Working Group chooses to *stop*
> >> work on a deliverable, the Process requires the WG to produce a Note
> >> "to indicate that work has ended on" the deliverable. (See ยง7.1 of
> >> the World Wide Web Consortium Process Document of 14 October 2005.)
> >> So the choice before the Working Group is to either continue work on
> >> Microdata, or to stop work on it (publish it as a Note). If we choose
> >> to continue work on it, it remains on the REC track because the REC
> >> track is literally composed of those things that we are working on as
> >> a Working Group.
> You replied:
> > This is one (fairly strange) interpretation of W3C Note.
> I think the process document is pretty clear on this, but I'd be
> interested to hear from Mike, our Team contact. Mike?

The process document says, "A Working Group Note is published by a
chartered Working Group to indicate that work has ended on a particular
topic." So there's nothing strange about your statement at all.


Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 02:09:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:59 UTC