RE: Put Editor's draft on TR page, not heartbeat formal publications -> RE: Evaluating policies; pubrules

>Isn't this already the case for WGs that include a link to the Editor's Draft in the
>spec header and don't enforce heartbeat pubs just for the sake of it?

No, it's different because the latest Editor's draft appears on the TR page.  It's like instantly publishing a WG Draft on the TR page each time there's a new Editor's draft.  (It could be called WG Draft instead of Editor's Draft since it replaces the longer more formal publication of intermediate drafts).

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 4:52 AM
>To: Carr, Wayne
>Cc: Dominique Hazael-Massieux; public-w3process@w3.org
>Subject: Re: Put Editor's draft on TR page, not heartbeat formal publications ->
>RE: Evaluating policies; pubrules
>
>On 3/20/12 4:48 PM, ext Carr, Wayne wrote:
>> Proposal: For WGs that have public editor's drafts, put the disclosure notice in
>the Editor's draft and put the Editor's draft on the TR page.  Don't publish regular
>formal heartbeat drafts.  Just publish formal versioned drafts for the required
>stages (First Draft, LC, CR, PR, REC).  Also, provide access to the editor's drafts
>under source control so people can look at it at a particular date if they need to.
>
>Isn't this already the case for WGs that include a link to the Editor's Draft in the
>spec header and don't enforce heartbeat pubs just for the sake of it?
>
>If a WG does want to publish intermediate WDs (i.e. WDs between FPWD and
>LCWD) on /TR/, I don't think the process should prohibit it.
>
>-Thanks, ArtB
>

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 21:04:55 UTC