Re: Proposition to change the prefixing policy

On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> Tantek's proposal, which he brought to the group late in the last
> Paris FtF, hits approximately the same sweet spot but with less
> ambiguity - it's nearly a mechanical process.  As a reminder, his
> proposal is that, at the moment anyone can prove two interop
> implementations of a feature with a WG-approved testsuite, we cut that
> feature into an LC->CR draft.  In effect, we have a constantly-moving
> ED, with snapshots of testably-interop features calved off as
> necessary.
>
> I think that Florian's proposal matches what a lot of us want to see,
> and that Tantek's proposal accomplishes Florian's goals with the least
> ambiguity (and thus greatest chance of success) of all the variants
> I've heard so far.  We should adopt it.


Given your summary of Tantek's proposal, I think I support it as well.
However, I would like to see it in concrete form to be sure. Is it well
documented at some link?