Steps to transition MathML Core to CR

We talked last week about publishing MathML Core as a Candidate 
Recommendation. Here are the administrative things we still need to do.

First, I need to ask for a transition, i.e., I need to ask that some 
people on the W3C team (not me) verify that all requirements are met. 
Apart from some information that I can just copy & paste, I still need 
to provide them with the following:

1) A link to minutes or to an email from a WG chair that says that the 
WG has decided to request CR status. (A mail asking for objections that 
did not get replies also does the trick.)

2) A list of substantive changes since the last publication, a bit more 
readable than a raw list of GitHub commits. It could be a section in the 
spec itself, or just some text that I can put in an email.

3) If requirements (e.g., those in the charter) are not satisfied, an 
explanation why. We don't have unsatisfied requirements, do we?

4) A list of dependencies (normative references) that are not 
(Candidate) Recommendations or equivalent and whose future changes may 
affect MathML Core. We have some references to drafts, notably CSS 
drafts. I think they are: CSS-VALUES-4, CSS-TEXT-4, css-sizing-3, CSS-
POSITION-3, CSS-FONTS-4, css-box-4 and css-align-3. Apart from listing 
them, is there anything noteworthy about them?

5) Show that we had wide review, or at least gave people the opportunity 
for review. A link to the closed issues is probably enough.

6) Show that we had horizontal review. I think these are the reviews:
  - TAG: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/438
  - a11y: https://github.com/w3c/a11y-request/issues/73
    (still open, but long ago)
  - i18n: https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/issues/226
    (still open, but all review issues are already closed)
  - Privacy: https://github.com/w3cping/privacy-request/issues/130
  - Security: https://github.com/w3c/security-request/issues/64
    (still open, but long ago)

6) Show that all issues were addressed. There are still open issues, so 
we need to close them, or explain that they don't need to be closed.

7) Describe the expected process for proving that the spec can be 
implemented, i.e., our plans for testing, including an estimate of how 
well the spec is already implemented now and an estimate of the minimal 
time until Recommendation. I think our process is simply to use the Web 
Platform Tests project. I think some 90% of the tests already succeed. 
How much of the spec do the test cover? What shall we say for the 
minimal duration of the CR period? Three months? (This is not a promise, 
just an estimated lower bound.)


When my colleagues say the transition request meets all requirements, I 
can ask for a publication. (That involves making a copy of the document 
with the proper style and some other things. I probably can do that 
myself.)



Bert
-- 
  Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/
  http://www.w3.org/people/bos                               W3C/ERCIM
  bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93
  +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France