On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 17:57:22 +0200, Revising W3C Process Community Group
Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> w3process-ISSUE-95 (Clarify Rec->Edited Rec): Clarify the process of
> moving from REC to edited REC [Document life cycle (ch 7)]
>
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/95
>
> It is not entirely clear exactly what you have to do to produce an
> Edited Rec. The idea is that if you don't need a technical review
> (editorial changes only), you can go straight to Proposed Rec.
If you are making invisible changes (i.e. a broken stylesheet link, a
markup fix), you don't even need that.
But it is unclear what happens for e.g. a reference that gets changed. I
don't really care either way for now, so I will leave it as unclear as it
has always been.
> If you made any substantive change you need a Candidate recommendation
> review, because there is no other guarantee that you didn't in fact
> touch on new IPR.
>
> There should be a flow diagram here to clarify.
I've made the diagram, and it is attached here.
Hopefully I will publish a version of the document in an hour or two with
text to match, and I will be ready to declare it done for this revision...
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
