W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > February 2014

Re: Suggested edits [Was: Analysis of redundancy of text on Notes in draft Chapter 7]

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:53:19 +0100
To: "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org Community Group" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.xbhny5jzy3oazb@chaals.local>
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:08:28 +0100, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 12:52 PM, "Charles McCathie Nevile"  
>> <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:25:33 +0100, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
[...]
>>>> In separate email I will propose changes.
>>>
>>> Before you do, please look at the 14 feb draft (or the one I will push  
>>> tonight, but on notes they are the same), where I revised the text as  
>>> explained in the previous dicsussion on this topic.
>
> I looked at the 14 Feb draft.

Thank you. Note that the changes discussed below will be applied to the  
February 18 draft. Please refer to that for further suggestions.

> * 7.1: Comments still apply.

>> Change the whole section "Groups....historical reference." to:
>>
>>  Groups may also publish other material as <a href="#WGNote">W3C  
>> Notes</a> for informative, administrative, and historical purposes.

I left a bit more text to illustrate what these purposes might be. I left  
out the link - there is one immediately above.

> * 7.1.2: Add to the end of your text: "A Note has no  formal standing as  
> a W3C Recommendation. " I think this text makes sense here rather than
> elsewhere because it is part of a definition of the maturity level.

Yes. But I worded it differently. There are Notes which are (small-R)  
recommendations, such as good practices guides and techniques.

> * 7.3.3: Comments still apply (that is: no change required)

Done ;)

> * 7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note: Your text looks  
> fine. You put the bulk of the examples here (I had them
>     in the definition but it's ok to list them here instead) and also  
> added the "prior publication" bullet point which I had wanted.
>    You may still want a cross ref from this section to the definition of  
> Note.

No, I really don't. The chapter isn't that big, and too many cross  
references end up being confusing instead of helpful. So unless someone  
really does want one, I won't put one in.

> Thanks!

Thank you for the feedback

Chaals

>
>>
>> Hi Charles,
>>
>> I already have the suggestions ready to go. If there's time to get them  
>> into the draft you push tonight, that would be great, otherwise please  
>> consider them for the next draft.
>>
>> I believe the rewrite keeps all the key information:
>>
>> * Definition
>> * No formal standing as a Recommendation
>> * Examples
>> * Usage for stopping wrok
>> * No prior WD required
>>
>> I have added some cross-references as part of the edits.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> [1]  
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Feb/0049.html
>>
>> -----------------------------------
>> 7.1 W3C Technical Reports
>>
>> Change the whole section "Groups....historical reference." to:
>>
>>  Groups may also publish other material as <a href="#WGNote">W3C  
>> Notes</a> for
>>  informative, administrative, and historical purposes.
>>
>> -----------------------------------
>> 7.1.2 Maturity Levels
>>
>>   A Working Group Note or Interest Group Note is published by a
>>   chartered Working Group or Interest Group to provide a stable
>>   reference for a document that is not intended to be a specification
>>   requiring conformance, but is nevertheless useful.  A Note has no
>>   formal standing as a W3C Recommendation. Notes are used, for
>>   example, to document cases and requirements, good practices,
>>   background information for a specification, or to let
>>   the world known Recommendation-track work has stopped or been
>>   abandoned (see section 7.3.3.).
>>
>> 7.3.3 Stopping Work on a specification
>>
>>   No changes proposed
>>
>> 7.8 Publishing a Working Group or Interest Group Note
>>
>>  Delete "Working Groups and Interest Groups publish material that is
>>  not a formal specification as Notes. This may include supporting
>>  documentation for a specification, such as requirements, use cases,
>>  good practices and the like, as well as specifications where work
>>  has been stopped and there is no longer interest in making them a
>>  new standard."
>>
>>  Change "In order to publish a Note a Working Group or Interest Group:"
>>
>>  To:
>>
>>   In order to publish a <a href="#WGNote">Note</a>, a Working Group
>>   or Interest Group:"
>>
>>  Following the bullet list, add:
>>
>>  <p>A Working Group or Interest Group may publish a Note with or
>>   without its prior publication as a Working Draft.</p>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
>
>
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2014 17:53:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:17 UTC