Re: [CSS2] Proposed process for maintaining CSS2

> On May 8, 2017, at 17:55 , Geoffrey Sneddon <> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Alan Stearns <> wrote:
>> We’ve had several conversations about CSS2 maintenance recently. I’ve added a summary of the current state of the proposal to the wiki:
>> Please use this thread to discuss any changes or clarifications we may need to make.
> I discussed a bunch of things around the CSS2 maintenance story with
> plh today; I'll let him correct me if I mis-summarise him!
> I believe he views "We want a draft with changes in-line for review
> published on TR" as a goal we don't need: while we need to have "wide
> review", we don't need a document in TR-space for this. We're strictly
> making this harder for ourselves than we need to. We can just get the
> wide-review done on the editor's draft (or, even, from the Director's
> viewpoint, on the errata document itself!).
> As such, his suggestion is that we just take the two-ED route and do that.
> I'll also point out the wiki page has a paragraph beginning with
> "Another option, and I think more usual, is to issue a Proposed Edited
> Rec", but PERs don't exist under the 2017 Process, which from this
> thread I believe is from Liam?

um, I think ‘edited recommendation’ exists, and it goes through a ‘proposed’ stage


David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2017 18:33:56 UTC