Re: [Issue 72] Coalescing Subtantive Change and the Classes of Changes

On Jan 4, 2014, at 8:41 PM, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com> wrote:

> Ian,
> You objected to Charles McCathie-Neviles’ combination of Change Classes and Substantive Change. Could you accept the change outlined below:

I believe we have discussed the difference between "substantive" definitions in the current (operative) Process:

 - Before Rec we define substantive in terms of people's reviews.
 - After Rec we define substantive in terms of conformance/implementation.

The AB reconfirmed that distinction, I believe at the Tokyo face-to-face meeting.

The current proposal drops the distinction, redefining "substantive" only in terms of conformance. 

I have not seen rationale for why there is a new proposal related to an issue we've already closed. What is the rationale?

Ian




>  
> Section 7.6.2 Classes of Changes to a Recommendation says
>  
> This document distinguishes the following classes of changes to a Recommendation.
>  
> 1. No changes to text content
> These changes include fixing broken links, style sheets or invalid markup.
> 2. Corrections that do not affect conformance
> Editorial changes or clarifications that do not change the technical content of the specification.
> 3. Corrections that do not add new features
> These changes may affect conformance to the Recommendation. A change that affects conformance is one that:
> turns conforming data, processors, or other conforming agents into non-conforming agents, or
> turns non-conforming agents into conforming ones, or
> clears up an ambiguity or under-specified part of the specification in such a way that an agent whose conformance was once unclear becomes clearly conforming or non-conforming.
> 4. New features
> The first two classes of change require no technical review of the proposed changes. A Working Group may request republication of a Recommendation for these classes of change, or W3C may republish a Recommendation with this class of change. The modified Recommendation is published according to the Team's requirements, including Publication Rules [PUB31] and the Requirements for modification of W3C Technical Reports [PUB@@].
>  
> It is suggested that the definition of “Substantive Change” be moved to this section and be changed to say that a Substantive Change is either a class 3 or class 4 change. This removes some of the vagueness (“bug fixes”) in the current Substantive Change definition.
>  
> Steve Zilles

--
Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447

Received on Sunday, 5 January 2014 23:28:28 UTC