Re: [w3c/editing] CfC: Publish the "ContentEditable" draft spec as a note (Issue #479)

From a Process point of view, doing as you suggest is allowed, but as long as we're publishing it, I think it would be more appropriate to republish as a Discontinued Draft rather than as a Note.

https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#abandon-draft

The "Discontinued Draft" status hasn't always existed, and when it didn't, republishing as Note was occasionally used to park work that is no longer being pursued, but that's not the recommended way to do things nowadays, because:
* Notes are generally meant for useful non-normative documents, and (ab)using this type of document as a graveyard for the normative specifications diminishes the "brand value" of Notes in general
* Notes and REC track document have different patent regimes, and switching work away from the REC track has unfortunate side effects in that respect. Patent questions are part of why "Discontinued Draft" is the accepted/preferred way to discontinue REC track work.

Then again, as far as I can see, this spec was never published at all (in the sense of published by W3C, on /TR). So whether as a Note or as a (Discontinued) REC track draft, it's final publication would also be its first one. I would still suggest that you publish it on the REC track, as a FPWD, and the immediately republish as a Discontinued Draft: the upside is that this captures patent commitments, in case this work is ever resurrected.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/479#issuecomment-2636098918
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/editing/issues/479/2636098918@github.com>