W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > September 2016

Re: fixing process regression related to typo fixes

From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:47:54 -0400
To: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Cc: Tantek Γ‡elik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <525a7e40-a43d-c759-a796-e9dfddf89391@w3.org>

On 9/12/2016 1:49 PM, Stephen Zilles wrote:
> Comments inline below.
> Steve Z
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: L. David Baron [mailto:dbaron@dbaron.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 5:28 PM
>> To: public-w3process@w3.org
>> Subject: fixing process regression related to typo fixes
>> Given the call for comments [1] on the Process 2016, I wanted to re-raise an
>> issue that has been raised here before:
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0143.html
>> in the hopes that it could be addressed in Process 2016.
>> This was a regression in Process 2014 (links to relevant changeset and issue are
>> in the email above) that changed the process to require that typo fixes or other
>> _Editorial changes_ to W3C Recommendations go through Proposed
>> Recommendation or Proposed Edited Recommendation rather than just being
>> able to be published.
>> It would be good to revert to the 2005 state in which working groups can make
>> editorial changes to recommendations without going through PR and an AC
>> vote to do so.
> I do believe that the change in the Process 2014 document was a conscious choice and not an accident. The main argument for the change was that can anyone tell (without review) whether an editorial change is truly editorial. That is why the all text changes became reviewable. This argument is stated in more detail in
>    https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0145.html
> from Wayne Carr which is a response to Elika's message that you point to above. Wayne suggests several other ways to get the necessary review, but does not believe that they are improvements.
> Any change in this area should have wider discussion prior to changing the process.

I think David's issue is important and I would encourage you to 
entertain such a wider discussion during your TPAC presentation. Let's 
hear what the Membership has to say!

>> -David
>> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-
>> members/2016JulSep/0016.html
>> --
>> π„ž   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
>> 𝄒   Mozilla                          https://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
>>               Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
>>               What I was walling in or walling out,
>>               And to whom I was like to give offense.
>>                 - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
Received on Monday, 12 September 2016 18:47:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:40 UTC