Re: Patent Commitments and Dead Ends

26.12.2016, 14:02, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>:
> On 12/25/2016 11:37 PM, Michael Champion wrote:

>>  Likewise it would be good to figure out how the W3C WG process or
>>  the CSS culture could be tweaked to ensure that the w3.org/TR page
>>  doesn’t remain littered with supposed Rec-track specs that aren’t
>>  going anywhere because proponents lost interest, don’t solve a real
>>  world problem, or nobody plans to implement them. That’s one of
>>  the problems WICG was intended to solve, by not putting specs on
>>  the Rec track until they had sustained interest, demonstrably solved
>>  a real problem, and had implementer buy in. There’s surely other
>>  ways to solve that problem besides insisting on incubation in WICG,
>>  so let’s discuss.
>
> The CSSWG has so far used the technique of "Republish the spec with
> empty content and an obnoxious notice of obsoletion" for closing off
> abandoned specs. This at least makes it clear that the spec is no
> longer under development.
>
> It would be *better* if the Process allowed for WDs and CRs to be
> rescinded. Currently only RECs can be rescinded. :(
>
> I guess that's a relatively easy fix; hadn't occurred to me to request it.
> Chaals? :) :)

The process currently suggests Working Groups publish dead things as notes - empty with the obnoxious notice is the common 'best practice'. Where W3C closes down work, they are required to do that. So I think the mechanism is there…

As I noted elsewhere, making the default view of the TR page reflect live things differently from dead things would be a simple thing to do, doesn't require any process change, just a bit of work on the page itself.

> ~fantasai

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - standards - Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Monday, 26 December 2016 22:52:15 UTC