Re: Disentangling the Note track from the W3C Recommendation track

I support this change.

I believe this will help the process for
https://w3cping.github.io/privacy-threat-model/, which otherwise would need
to live as just an Editor's Draft all the way until it's ready for
publication as a Note. Thank you!

Jeffrey

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:42 PM fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
wrote:

> Hello fellow spec-editors and friends!
>
> The Process CG is considering detangling the REC and NOTE tracks in order
> to
> make the Process more straightforward. The specific changes we are
> considering
> are:
>
>    * Introduce a new, dedicated status for documents retired from
>      the REC track (provisionally called "Discontinued Draft
>      Recommendation" but we can bikeshed that), to replace usage of
>      Notes for that purpose.
>
>    * Introduce a new, dedicated status to represent the optional
>      drafting stage of a NOTE (provisionally called "Draft Note"),
>      that does not invoke the Patent Policy, to replace this use of
>      WDs; and allow IGs to also publish them. (WD status is not
>      available to IGs because it invokes the Patent Policy.)
>
>    * Remove transitions between the two tracks, except maybe the
>      ability to restart on the other track if the WG realizes the
>      document belongs on the other track.
>
> Problems with the current Process:
>    * Confusion over the status of NOTEs representing former REC-track
>      documents.
>    * Triggering Calls for Exclusions for WDs of NOTEs.
>    * IGs unable to use a drafting stage for NOTEs.
>    * Possibility of, e.g. CR->NOTE->NOTE->CR which has confusing and
>      unfortunate implications for patent protection of changes made
>      while off the REC track.
>
> Hesitations about the changes:
>    * Introduces two more possible document statuses.
>
> The Process CG wants to know if there's support for these changes, or if
> there
> are concerns, so we know whether they are worth adopting for Process 2021!
>
> Please let us know what you think.
>
> Thanks~
> ~fantasai
>
> P.S. Anyone who cares about details is welcome to have a look at the
> actual
> pull request:
>      https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/488/files
> Issue & discussion, with diagrams of the Process before/after the changes:
>      https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/342
>
>