- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:12:46 -0400
- To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- CC: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 10/17/2013 9:44 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote: > Hi folks, > > as always at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html > > changes were mostly related to Ivan Herman's comments and subsequent > discussion: > - tweaked and poked at Section 7.6.2 on modifying a recommendation > - added requirements for status to be unique, and explicitly identify > if a spec is published as a provisionally approved Recommendation > (technically, there is no requirement to republish in this case) or a > W3C Recommendation (Yes, these really need to be republished still :) ). > - Some editorial stuff > > Full changelog at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/ > > Your comments on the changes, or the document as is, are as always > very welcome. > > There are now 7 issues pending review. Issues 2 and 37 are old and I > think only pending review because we forget them. 44-46 are from the > last draft (there has been no meeting of the Ch7TF since then). Issue > 47 is dealt with in this draft, but I am not sure if it is ready for > closing, and would really appreciate a close look. Issue 48 is also > dealt with in this draft, and while of course I appreciate feedback I > am happier that it has been handled reasonably. > > There is also the open issue 39 (transition) and accompanying > discussion on this list. > > Finally, Ivan Herman points out that the name Last Call Candidate > Recommendation is horrid. I agree, but think we need "Last Call" in > the title to help us clarify that it is the stage referred to in the > Patent Policy as "Last Call". Anyone have a good idea for this? How about "Last Call"? > > cheers > > Chaals >
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 14:12:49 UTC