- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:33:36 +0200
- To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, "Stephen Zilles" <szilles@adobe.com>
On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 07:13:25 +0200, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
wrote:
> Charles,
> A couple of small points.
Note that unless someone screams, these will all appear in the next
editor's draft, sometime this week.
> 1. Implementation Experience.
> You added, " As creating, reviewing, and running tests can be very
> time-consuming, Working Groups are often able to work more effectively
> if they plan their test development work early in the development
> process."
>
> We have long held that tests are not necessarily required and that the
> criteria is demonstration of (interoperable) implementations. For this,
> tests are one way to go, but not necessarily the only way. So I suggest
> that you change your sentence to, " Planning and accomplishing a
> demonstration of (interoperable) implementations can be very time
> consuming. Groups are often able to work more effectively if they plan
> how they will demonstrate interoperable implementations early in the
> development process; for example, they may wish to develop tests in
> concert with implementation efforts."
Sure. (Since I don't think that sentence matters, it would be silly to
suggest I care that what is in it matters :) ).
> 2. In bullet 3 of 7.2, the word "change" should occur after
> "substantive" in the first sentence.
Yep.
> 3. I am a bit confused about the subsection of 7.4.5 on "edited
> Recommendations". This section list as a "SHOULD" that the Working
> Group, " SHOULD document known implementation.", but this is one of the
> General Requirements of 7.2. Does this mean that the General
> Requirements do not apply or should this requirement be removed in favor
> of the General Requirements (which seem to be required for "all W3C
> Recommendations" per the next paragraph.
It should be removed - it's just an editorial error. Thanks for catching
it.
cheers
Chaals
> Steve Z.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:24 PM
> To: public-w3process@w3.org
> Subject: New Editor's draft of Chapter 7
>
> Hi folks, as always the latest draft is at
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html
>
> Changes:
> - email thread starting at
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Sep/0018.html>
> editorial stuff
> - clarified up requirements for an Edited Recommendation
> - simplified errata, so making normative changes doesn't have a possible
> parallel process any more.
> - added a sentence to the implementation experience section, advising
> people to plan early.
>
> There are currently 7 issues pending review
> <https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/pendingreview> (i.e.
> I believe the draft addresses them) and none which have not been
> addressed.
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
>
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 14:34:10 UTC