Re: CfC: to using new pub process; deadline October 2

25.09.2014, 16:06, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@gmail.com>:
> On 9/25/14 9:32 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> šOk so, let's start getting consensus on the new pub work flow [1]. I want us to be the first using the new pub process the second it is available.
>>
>> šDoes anyone object to Editors in this group using [1]?
>>
>> š[1] http://www.w3.org/2014/08/pubworkflow.html

I can't see any reason to object to using this.

But I would object to publishing "every" update to an editor's draft as the new /TR draft.

Editor's drafts need to be readily available for a variety of stakeholders.

/TR drafts should be updated "when there have been significant changes to the previous published document that would benefit from review beyond the Working Group" - http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#revised-wd

I.e. TR drafts should have a bit more stability than is required for an editor's draft. In many cases it makes a lot of sense to check in each little change separately to an editor's draft, in order to get good logging of what actually changed. Whereas a TR draft should be able to sum up the differences between it and a previous version (with a significant change) in a few lines.

cheers

> Thanks Marcos.
>
> All - if you have any comments or concerns about Marcos' CfC above,
> please send them to public-webapps @ w3.org by October 2 at the latest.
> Positive response is preferred and encouraged and silence will be
> considered as agreement with the proposal.
>
> -Thanks, ArtB

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Monday, 29 September 2014 07:51:34 UTC