- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 18:58:58 +0100
- To: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-web-security@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+WjMXT3sk9ZETSoJNxSXNBswZq_iO3mJ4hjWwSsNztaw@mail.gmail.com>
On 8 February 2017 at 18:15, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org> wrote: > > On 2/8/17 10:49 AM, Philippe Le Hégaret wrote: > > > 3. Republication of a new Recommendation with substantive changes is > > > governed by (no change since W3C Process 2015): > > ... > > > > > > In other words, this is not a current possibility for the Web > > > Cryptography API since the Working Group is closed. > > > > OK. So what is the process that will need to actually happen should > > there be need for substantive errata? > > 2 possibilities: > > 1. Get W3C to have a new proposed Working Group charter to do the work > There tends to be quite a high bar for a new W3C Working Group. But FWIW, I would support it > > 2. Get W3C to revise the charter of an existing Working Group to add the > deliverable into it > > Both of those cases would fall under > https://www.w3.org/2017/Process-20170301/#WGCharterDevelopment > > but the second path is a lot easier to do that the first one. > > In either case, making sure that the errata page gets updated with > editorial and substantive changes is important. > > For what is worth, I believe this is too heavy process and have been > working on a proposal to authorize W3C to make substantive changes to its > W3C Recommendation without a Working Group: > > https://github.com/w3c/standards-track/blob/spec-stages/ > stages.md#3-maintenance-of-an-errata-page-for-the-w3c- > recommendation-and-revising-a-recommendation-using-an-errata-list > I was however too late to get that proposal considered for Process 2017, > so it's not an option unfortunately. > > Philippe > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2017 17:59:32 UTC