Re: Everblue Standards :D

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 06:10:46PM -0400, Jeff Jaffe wrote:
> 1. I see nothing wrong in marking the spec in a way that shows that
>    only certain chapters have changed.

FWIW, I think it's more common that a change impacts many places 
distributed across a specification, so I don't really see how this could
be used in practice. A 'diff' is what is generally most useful.

> 2. I see nothing wrong in sending the spec out for wide review and
>    opining with wide reviewers that the WG believes that they only need
>    to review those chapters that have changed.

That's what the patent policy call for exclusions do anyway, they apply
only to changes wrt the previous publication. So no change here.

> 3. If a horizontal review group sees the logic of why they only need to
>    review certain chapters; they provide that limited review; and
>    conclude that the spec has no issues (even though they chose not to
>    look at "Chapter 10"), then I think W3C should accept that as a
>    completed horizontal review.  But, if an objection arises
>    nonetheless, the objection still needs to be addressed.

Again, that's current practice, IMHO.

Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2019 07:48:30 UTC