On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote: > > Regarding the publishing plan above, the latest process document includes > an expectation that before a CR is published the spec "has already received > wide review" [1]. Although the group is free to determine the wide review > "requirements" (see [2]), it can be useful to publish a new WD and use that > WD as the basis of the wide review. It would also be possible to use an ED > (perhaps a static snapshot) as the basis for the review. There is also a > question about which group(s) we explicitly want to ask to review the spec. > > What are your thoughts on the document (WD vs. ED snapshot) to use as the > review? > If there's no particular problem, an ED snapshot would be great to avoid redundant publication preparations. In that case, I'll try to get it well prepared before we request it. > > Which groups do we ask to review? I presume at least TAG and Web Mobile > IG. Are there others? > I presume TAG, Web Mobile IG, WebAppSec (Security standpoint), Geolocation WG (Geofencing uses SW) would be good. Any other suggestions? Thanks, Jungkee > > -Thanks, AB > > [1] <http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#maturity-levels> > [2] <http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#wide-review> > > -- Jungkee Song
Received on Friday, 18 September 2015 14:46:56 UTC