Re: W3C Process Intro ("Process 101") (was EOWG: Agenda for 4 August 2006 Teleconference)

William & EOWG,

You seem to question the importance of explaining other types of W3C documents in your email[1]. 

It has been important to clarify that the WCAG 2.0 supporting documents are *not* on the W3C Recommendation track. For example,
- In the WCAG 2.0 Extension e-mail at:
- In the Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents at:
In this version, we just say "(supporting document)", as I thought it not necessary to clarify that "the other supporting documents will be W3C Notes or WAI resources" as I had in previous versions.

Note that I think the only type of W3C WAI documents are:
1. W3C Recommendations [formal process for]
2. W3C Working Groups Notes [formal process for]
2. "WAI Resources" [which includes most of the EOWG deliverables and WAI site pages]

While it may not be important in the "Process 101" doc to explain W3C Notes in detail; it may be good to mention briefly something about not all W3C docs are Recommendations, or that some documents along with W3C Recommendations are not actual Recommendations -- or, specifically under the WAI section that the supporting documents, such as the Techniques, are not W3C Recommendations, or... ?

EOWG: Comments?
~ Shawn

[1] William Loughborough wrote:
> Shawn Henry wrote:
>> - I think we probably should include something about Notes; however, 
>> I'm a little concerned about expanding the document.
> If we must explain 'Notes' as well as 'recommendations/standards' then 
> where do we stop?
> Redundancy is imperative on rocket ships to the moon, but not so much so 
> in an array of similar documents.
> Love.

Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 17:35:37 UTC