[admin] Director's considerations when evaluating normative references

Hi All,

TL;DR: the process for evaluating normative references during Technical 
Reports transitions is now defined in 
<http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references>.

One of the parts of the Technical Reports advancement process is an 
evaluation of a spec's normative references. This evaluation is done 
during transitions such as moving from Last Call Working Draft to 
Candidate Recommendation. The evaluation process previously used 
"maturity" of a reference as the primary evaluation criteria (f.ex. to 
advance to Recommendation, all normative refs had to be at least at the 
Proposed Recommendation maturity level).

Philippe and Ralph Swick created a new document to describe the 
evaluation process. Although the maturity of references is still a 
consideration, it isn't the only factor. Here's a snippet of the high 
level goals:

[[
<http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references >

This document explains considerations the Director takes into account 
when evaluating normative references from W3C documents at transitions 
on theW3C Recommendation track 
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#Reports>. These 
considerations may be used by the Working Group while evaluating the 
risk associated with specific design choices during the group's 
deliberations. The Director may refer to this document when a transition 
request is being decided.

At a high level, when a W3C specification has normative references to 
other documents the Director considers 3 factors: stability, schedule 
and licensing. Any of the factors described in this document are fodder 
for Director consideration. No single factor is decisive. Different 
cases will involve different combinations of these factors. The Director 
may consider other factors not listed in this document as well; e.g. the 
likelihood that W3C may wish to submit the Recommendation to ISO and the 
PAS criteria for normative references.
]]

I encourage everyone, especially the Editors, to read this document. It 
includes a relatively long list of questions that could be considered a 
bit "daunting". However, I want to highlight something Ralph says below 
-> "the W3C Director stresses that the document should not be 
interpreted as a checklist of pass/fail criteria".

I think this document provides good clarifications regarding important 
aspects of the evaluation process and provides useful guidelines (in the 
form of questions) for the group to consider as a spec `matures`.

If you have any general comments, concerns, etc. regarding this 
document, please send them to the public-w3process list. If your 
comments are specific to this group (f.ex. "so, what does this mean for 
WebApps") then I think this list would be fine for comments.

-Thanks, AB

On 10/18/13 1:37 PM, ext Ralph Swick wrote:

Philippe and I have worked with Tim to create a document describing
considerations the Director takes into account when evaluating normative
references in Recommendation Track documents.

   https://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references

As you read this you will see that the maturity level of a document that
is normatively referenced is only one of many factors.  The factors
described in this document can be interpreted as guidelines to advise a
Working Group as it is developing a specification.   Tim stresses that
the document should not be interpreted as a checklist of pass/fail criteria.

We hope this document proves helpful to Working Groups throughout the
specification development process.

-Ralph and Philippe
  with Tim Berners-Lee, Director

Received on Sunday, 20 October 2013 15:25:51 UTC