- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:00:19 -0400
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
On 9/17/2013 4:49 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Jeff Jaffe wrote: >> On 9/17/2013 3:14 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >>> Furthermore, the Working Group is required to formally address comments >>> like those described above in a timely manner and must attempt to >>> satisfy the reviewer. But the proposed plan does not make clear that it >>> will formally address them prior to making a Last Call announcement, and >>> likely make substantive changes to the document in response, even though >>> none of the rules imposed on group participants have been followed. >> These issues would be treated as post-Last Call issues, but they would >> still need to be addressed before going to a Recommendation. > You mean pre-Last Call, For issues that come in after the deadline: - the WG can choose to address them before last call (e.g. for bug fixes, or items that the WG wants to address immediately) - as a default, they would be postponed and addressed as post-Last Call issues. > if the Working Group decides to address them by > making changes that are not minor changes like "clarifications, bug > fixes, editorial repairs, and minor error corrections". Here: > > A technical report is returned to a Working Group for further work in > either of the following situations: > > 1. The Working Group makes substantive changes to the technical > report at any time after a Last Call announcement and prior to > Publication as a Recommendation, except when the changes involve > the removal of features at risk identified in a Call for > Implementations. In the case of substantive changes, the Working > Group MUST republish the technical report as a Working Draft. > > 2. The Director requires the Working Group to address important > issues raised during a review or as the result of implementation > experience. In this case, Director MAY request that the Working > Group republish the technical report as a Working Draft, even if > the Working Group has not made substantive changes. > > The Director MUST inform the Advisory Committee and group Chairs when > a technical report has been returned to a Working Group for further > work. > > After republication as a Working Draft, the next forward step > available to the Working Group is a Last Call announcement. The Last > Call announcement MAY occur at the same time as the publication of > the Working Draft. > > As per <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/process.html#return-to-wg>. > > By the way, could you point me to the document the Working Group has > published under the provisions of Process section 6.2.7 3rd paragraph? I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you looking for a pointer to the draft that was published last week?
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 22:00:26 UTC