- From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:13:06 -0800
- To: W3C Process CG <public-w3process@w3.org>
I had a homework assignment, to determine what we would change if we were to define W3C Memoranda and enable (at least) the TAG to elevate their Note documents. I am happy to say that I reviewed the separate ‘memoranda’ Pull Request prepared by our mighty editor, and apart from some minor tweaks to adjust for the missing language changes, the last four commits in that PR are exactly what I would say. the last 4 commits 8d37bfa <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/commit/8d37bfa555f23544a19d7a488c30c13c9d2c60be> 168d7ef <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/commit/168d7efdbe731eaa99b1b292b3fa3a38707d47aa> dae9fdb <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/commit/dae9fdb43e78e3e17132c1b59a23f39707351087> 98194d3 <https://github.com/w3c/w3process/commit/98194d303301b12bece9116e424de11bc0db35f0> (Note that Florian had the third commit repeated; I have taken the liberty of correcting his comment). In effect, this edits the “Notes” section to * open Notes to all WGs, all IGs, the AB and TAG * define the process to elevate a Note to Memorandum * define the process for publishing a revised Memorandum * restrict elevation of implementable technologies (particularly thinking, of course, of Discontinued Rec-track work) I see little point in making a parallel set of commits with only minor changes to align to the old terminology. Dave Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple singer@apple.com
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2021 22:13:25 UTC