Publication Policies

Resources

Tools

Three Services: Pubrules, Checker, Sample

This resource provides three services:

  1. Pubrules filter, which shows only the relevant requirements for publication of a W3C Technical Report, Submission, or Incubator Report.
  2. Checker, available in two flavors:
    • Use auto mode to determine values from the document and then run the checker (then switching to manual mode for adjustments).
    • Use manual mode to exercise control over the type of tests run and their display.
  3. A sample of what the front of the document should look like given the chosen characteristics

Publication requirements and checker test results are shown below. The requirements and template are not shown in "Checker (Auto)" mode until you have run the checker.

A companion document includes a glossary, roles, and history of this document. A comparison of requirements across all document types is available.

For information about process requirements (how to request a transition, how to request publication, etc.), see How to Organize a Recommendation Track Transition. If you would like to discuss technical report production informally among your peers and get the latest tips and techniques, try the spec-prod mailing list (archive). Document Contacts should consult the W3C Manual of Style for guidance on additional publication topics and conventions.

Document Requirements

The Document Contact MUST verify that the requirements in this section (listed in "document order") have been satisfied before requesting publication. How to Organize a Recommendation Track Transition explains the remainder of the publication process.

See the sample below that has been generated by the parameters you have chosen in the form at the top of this document, summarized here:

1. Normative Document Representation

  1. normativeVersionTest At least one normative representation MUST be available for requests that use the "This Version" URI. More than one normative representation MAY be delivered in response to such requests. A "This Version" URI MUST NOT be used to identify a non-normative representation.
  2. valideHTMLTest recursive All normative representations MUST validate as one of the following: HTML 4.x, or some version of XHTML or XHTML+RDFa that is a W3C Recommendation. HTML5 is also permitted with the following limitations:
    • Inline markup for SVG 1.1 or MathML 2.0 is permitted but only with a (fallback) alternative.
    • If the HTML5 validator issues content warnings, the publication request must include rationale why the warning is not problematic.
    Note: Please consider how your content will render in browsers that do not support HTML5.
  3. Visual styles SHOULD NOT vary significantly among normative alternatives.

Note: Serving two representations at the "this version" URI is an assertion by W3C that the documents are equivalent for the purposes of conveying the requirements of the document. In practice, the Comm Team will not read each alternative to verify that this is the case. If the Communications Team learns of substantive discrepancies between normative alternatives, the W3C Head of Communications may request that the author no longer serve the alternative as normative.

2. Document Metadata

  1. goodStylesheetTest recursive Each document MUST include the following absolute URI to identify a style sheet for this maturity level: http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WDhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-CRhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-PRhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-REChttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-PERhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-RSCNDhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-IG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-CG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-Member-SUBMhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-Team-SUBMhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-XGR

    Include this source code:
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WDhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-CRhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-PRhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-REChttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-PERhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-RSCNDhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-IG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-CG-NOTEhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-Member-SUBMhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-Team-SUBMhttp://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-XGR"/>

  2. lastStylesheetTest recursive Any internal style sheets MUST be cascaded before this link; i.e., the internal style sheets MUST NOT override the W3C tech report styles.

See also Style Guidelines for Group-Internal Drafts.

3. Front Matter

  1. divClassHeadTest The front matter MUST appear at the beginning of the body of the document, within <div class="head">. There is one exception to that requirement: the hr element after the copyright MAY appear inside or after the div element. Editors SHOULD NOT include other information in this section.

Logos

  1. logoTest The document MUST include a link to the W3C logo identified below. The URI used to identify the logo MUST be absolute.
    W3C

Title, Date, Maturity Level

  1. titleTest The document's title MUST be in the title element and in an h1 element.
  2. Technical report version information, i.e., version and edition numbers.
    1. If a Recommendation modified in place, see the Comm Team's policy regarding in-place modification of W3C Technical Reports, otherwise
    2. See the (non-normative) Version Management in W3C Technical Reports for more information
  3. dateTitleH2Test The document's status and date MUST be in an h2 element as follows (see also date syntax):
    <h2>W3C STATUS 14 August YYYY</h2>

    If this is a modified Recommendation that was modified in place or is a new edition, the document MUST include both the original publication date and the modification date. For example:

    <h2>W3C Recommendation 7 April 2004, 
        edited in place 19 August2004</h2>

Document Identifiers

  1. docIDFormat Document identifier information MUST be presented in a dl list, where each dt element marks up an identifier role ("This Version", "Latest Version", "Previous Version", etc.) and each dd element includes a link whose link text is the identifier.
  2. docIDOrder Document identifier information MUST be present in this order: Note: Because this is a first draft, there SHOULD NOT be a Previous version URI. Use the status section to identify the relationship(s) to previous work (e.g., previous Recommendations). In some cases (e.g., mere change of short name or when a monolithic specification has been split into multiple parts) a Previous version URI MAY appear. Ask the Comm Team if you have questions.
  3. docIDThisVersion The syntax of a "This Version" URI MUST SHOULD be <http://www.w3.org/TR/YYYY/WDCRPRPERRECNOTERSCND-shortname-YYYYMMDD/>. <http://www.w3.org/Submission/YYYY/SUBM-shortname-YYYYMMDD/>. <http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/YYYY/SUBM-shortname-YYYYMMDD/>. <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/xgname/XGR-shortname-YYYYMMDD/>.
  4. docIDLatestVersion The syntax of a "Latest Version" URI MUST SHOULD be <http://www.w3.org/TR/shortname/>. <http://www.w3.org/Submission/shortname/>. <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/xgname/XGR-shortname/>.
  5. docIDDate The title page date and the date at the end of the "This Version" URI MUST match.

Editor/Author Information

  1. editorSectionTest The editors'/authors' names MUST be listed. Affiliations and email addresses are OPTIONAL; email addresses are NOT RECOMMENDED. If an editor/author is acknowledged in an earlier version of this document and the individual's affiliation has since changed, list the individual using the notation "<name>, <affiliation> (until DD Month YYYY)". If the list of authors is very long (e.g., the entire Working Group), identify the authors in the acknowledgments section, linked from the head of the document. Distinguish any contributors from authors in the acknowledgments section.

Errata Information

  1. errataTest Immediately after the editors/authors' names, there MUST be a link to an errata document made with the following markup:

    <p>Please check the <a href="http://www.w3.org/..."><strong>errata</strong></a> for any errors or issues reported since publication.</p>

    The order of the a and strong elements MAY be reversed. See also suggestions on errata page structure in the Manual of Style. Note: Do not put the errata document in TR space as the expectation is that we will not modify document in TR space after publication; see the policy for in-place modification of W3C Technical Reports.

Links to non-normative document representations

  1. Authors MAY provide links to alternative (non-normative) representations or packages for the document. For instance:

    <p>This document is also available in these non-normative formats: <a href="STATUS-shortname-20020101.html">single HTML file</a>, <a href="STATUS-shortname-20020101.tgz">gzipped tar file of HTML</a>.</p> <a href="shortname-20020101.html">single HTML file</a>, <a href="shortname-20020101.tgz">gzipped tar file of HTML</a>.</p>

Translation Information

  1. translationTest There MUST be a link to a translations page. The RECOMMENDED markup is:

    <p>See also <a href=" http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byTechnology?technology=shortname"> <strong>translations</strong></a>.</p>

    See suggestions on translations in the manual of style.

Copyright Information

  1. W3CDocNoticeTest The document must include a link to the W3C document notice. The copyright may be held by the Submitters.
  2. hrAfterCopyrightTest A horizontal rule (hr) MUST follow the copyright.

4. Document Abstract

  1. abstractTest There MUST be an abstract, labeled with an h2 element with content "Abstract" that follows the hr element.

5. Document Status Section

  1. sotdTest There MUST be a status section that follows the abstract, labeled with an h2 element with content "Status of This Document". The Team maintains the status section of a document.
  2. boilerplateTRDocTest It MUST begin with the following boilerplate text:

    This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

  3. boilerplateMemberSubmTest It MUST include this boilerplate text (with links to the published Submission and Team Comment):

    By publishing this document, W3C acknowledges that the Submitting Members have made a formal Submission request to W3C for discussion. Publication of this document by W3C indicates no endorsement of its content by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any resources to the issues addressed by it. This document is not the product of a chartered W3C group, but is published as potential input to the W3C Process. A W3C Team Comment has been published in conjunction with this Member Submission. Publication of acknowledged Member Submissions at the W3C site is one of the benefits of W3C Membership. Please consult the requirements associated with Member Submissions of section 3.3 of the W3C Patent Policy. Please consult the complete list of acknowledged W3C Member Submissions.

  4. boilerplateTRDocTest It MUST begin with the following boilerplate text:

    This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of Final Incubator Group Reports is available. See also the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

  5. datesFormatTest All dates MUST have the form DD Month YYYY. A leading zero in the day is OPTIONAL.
  6. FPWDTest It MUST indicate that this is a First Public Working Draft.
  7. LCTest It MUST indicate that this is a Last Call Working Draft.
  8. WGLinkTest It MUST include the name of the W3C group that produced the document. The name MUST be a link to a public page for the group.
  9. XGLinkTest It MUST include the name of the W3C Incubator Group that produced the document. The name MUST be a link to a public page for the group.
  10. mailingListNameTest It MUST include the name of a mailing list for comments that has a public archive.
  11. mailingListLinkTest It MUST include a link to the public archive of that mailing list.
  12. ACRepFeedbackEmailTest It also MUST provide information to Advisory Committee Representatives about how to send their review comments (e.g., the link to all AC reviews, or a link to a specific questionnaire)
  13. commentsMailingListTest It MUST include the name of a mailing list for comments.
  14. reviewEndDateLCTest It MUST include the end date of the Last Call review period.
  15. reviewEndDateCRTest It MUST include the end date of the Candidate Recommendation review period.
  16. reviewEndDateCRTest It MUST include a minimal duration (before which the group will not request the next transition). The duration MUST be expressed as an estimated date.
  17. It SHOULD include an estimated date by which time the Working Group expects to have sufficient implementation experience.
  18. reviewEndDatePRTest It MUST include the end date of the review period.
  19. implReportTest It MUST include a link to a preliminary interoperability or implementation report, or a statement that no such report exists.
  20. implReportTest It MUST include either:
    • a link to an interoperability or implementation report if the Director used such a report as part of the decision to advance the specification, or
    • a statement that the Director's decision did not involve such a report.
  21. implReportTest It SHOULD include either:
    • a link to an interoperability or implementation report if the Director used such a report as part of the decision to advance the specification, or
    • a statement that the Director's decision did not involve such a report.
  22. featAtRiskTest It MUST identify any "features at risk" declared by the Working Group (as defined in section 7.4.3 of the W3C Process Document).
  23. If the previous version of this document was not a Candidate Recommendation, the status section SHOULD include rationale for the Director's decision to skip CR (e.g., there was already sufficient implementation experience).
  24. recRelationTest It MUST indicate its relationship to previous related Recommendations (e.g., an indication that a Recommendation supersedes, obsoletes, or subsumes another, or that a Recommendation is an editorial revision) and MUST link to the most recent Recommendation (if any) having the same major revision number. The document thus links to two important resources: the previous edition of the Recommendation via the status section, and the previous draft (the Proposed [Edited] Recommendation) via the "Previous version" link.
  25. It MUST indicate that it rescinds a Recommendation and MUST link to the most recent Recommendation (if any) having the same major revision number.
  26. A STATUS that revises a previously published Recommendation with the same major revision number SHOULD link to the most recent Recommendation with that major revision number. Example: The version 2.5 Working Draft is published after the 2.1 Second Edition Recommendation and links to it as the most recent 2.x Recommendation available at time of publication. Example: The version 2.1 Working Draft (Second Edition) is published after the 2.1 Recommendation and links to it as the most recent 2.x Recommendation available at time of publication.
  27. rescindDecisionTest It MUST include or link to rationale for the decision to rescind the Recommendation.
  28. If the document was published due to a W3C decision to stop work on this material, the status section SHOULD include that rationale.
  29. It SHOULD direct readers to alternative technologies.
  30. It SHOULD indicate the level of endorsement within the group for the material, set expectations that the group has completed work on the topics covered by the document, and set expectations about the group's commitment to respond to comments about the document.
  31. customParagraphTest It MUST include at least one customized paragraph. This section SHOULD include the title page date (i.e., the one next to the maturity level at the top of the document). These paragraphs SHOULD explain the publication context, including rationale and relationships to other work. See examples and more discussion in the Manual of Style.
  32. changesListTest It SHOULD MUST include a link to changes since the previous draft (e.g., a list of changes or a diff document or both; see the online HTML diff tool). The group MUST indicate which changes may affect conformance.
  33. stabilityTest It MUST set expectations about the (in)stability of the document. The RECOMMENDED text (see also ideas for status sections regarding the stability of group notes) is:

    Publication as a an STATUS does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.

  34. stabilityTest It MUST set expectations about the stability of the document. The RECOMMENDED text is:

    This document has been reviewed by W3C Members, by software developers, and by other W3C groups and interested parties, and is endorsed by the Director as a W3C Recommendation. It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited from another document. W3C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. This enhances the functionality and interoperability of the Web.

  35. stabilityTest It MUST set expectations about the stability of the document. The RECOMMENDED text is:

    Publication of this document by W3C as part of the W3C Incubator Activity indicates no endorsement of its content by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any resources to the issues addressed by it. Participation in Incubator Groups and publication of Incubator Group Reports at the W3C site are benefits of W3C Membership.

  36. patPolReqTest It MUST include this text related to patent policy requirements (with suitable links inserted; see guidelines for linking to disclosure pages):

    This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. This document is governed by the 24 January 2002 CPP as amended by the W3C Patent Policy Transition Procedure. This document is governed by the 24 January 2002 CPP as amended by the W3C Patent Policy Transition Procedure. The group does not expect this document to become a W3C Recommendation. This document is informative only. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.

    Note: Contact the Communications Team for suitable adaptations in the case where a document has been published jointly by more than one group. In the adaptation, be sure that the text for informative-only specs or specs not going to Rec is the same as the standard text.

  37. patPolReqTest It MUST include this text related to disclosure requirements (with a link to the disclosure section of the group charter).

    The disclosure obligations of the Participants of this group are described in the charter.

  38. Note: Please contact the Communications Team for information about what text to include related to patent policy requirements.
  39. Note: Incubator Groups have as a goal to produce work that can be implemented on a Royalty Free basis, as defined in the W3C Patent Policy. Please contact the Communications Team for information about what text to include related to patent policy requirements. Sample text for XGs where Participants have made no statements:

    Incubator Groups have as a goal to produce work that can be implemented on a Royalty Free basis, as defined in the W3C Patent Policy. Participants in this Incubator Group have made no statements about whether they will offer licenses according to the licensing requirements of the W3C Patent Policy for portions of this Incubator Group Report that are subsequently incorporated in a W3C Recommendation.

  40. knownDisclosureNumberTest It MUST NOT indicate the number of known disclosures at the time of publication.
  41. whichProcess If published after 2 September 2014, it MUST include the following boilerplate text that identifies the governing process:

    This document is governed by the 1 August 2014 W3C Process Document. 14 October 2005 W3C Process Document.

6. Table of Contents

  1. tocTest There SHOULD be a table of contents after the status section, labeled with an h2 element with content "Table of Contents".

7. Document Body

  1. headingWithoutIDTest recursive Every marked-up section and subsection of the document MUST have a target anchor. A section is identified by a heading element (h1-h6). The anchor may be specified using an id (or name if an a element is used) attribute on any of the following: the heading element itself, the parent div or section element of the heading element (where the heading element is the first child of the div or section), a descendant of the heading element, or an a immediately preceding the heading element.
  2. brokenLinkTest The document MUST NOT have any broken internal links or broken links to other resources at w3.org. The document SHOULD NOT have any other broken links.
  3. cssValideTest recursive The document MUST NOT have any style sheet errors.
  4. namespacesTest recursive All proposed XML namespaces created by the publication of the document MUST follow URIs for W3C Namespaces.
  5. wcagTest The document(s) MUST conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, Level AA. Note: You may wish to consult the customizable quick reference to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

8. Compound Documents

  1. compoundFilesLocationTest If the document is compound (i.e., if it consists of more than one file), all the files MUST be under a directory /TR/Submission/TeamSubmission/YYYY/WDCRPRPERRECNOTERSCNDSUBM-shortname-YYYYMMDD/ /2005/Incubator/xgname/XGR-shortname-YYYYMMDD/
  2. compoundOverviewTestThe main page SHOULD be called Overview.html.
  3. compoundTestAll other files MUST be reachable by links from the document.

Sample: Your Document Head Should Look Like This

Given the parameters you have chosen, the head of your document should resemble the instance shown below. Note however that you will still need to provide a custom paragraph in the status section, and you may also have to adjust some of the recommended language according to your publication context. The sample shown does not illustrate all of the requirements of pubrules: it does not illustrate every possible publication context or requirements beyond those of the document head and status section.

The following appear in the head element but are not shown here:

W3C W3C Member Submission W3C Team Submission W3C Incubator Report

SampleML 1.0 SampleML 1.0 (Second Edition) SampleML 1.1 SampleML 1.0

W3C Working Draft Candidate Recommendation Proposed Recommendation Proposed Edited Recommendation Recommendation Working Group Note Interest Group Note Coordination Group Note Member Submission Team Submission Rescinded Recommendation Incubator Group Report DD Month YYYY

...if edited in place, append...", edited in place DD Month YYYY"

This version:
http://www.w3.org/Submission/YYYY/SUBM-sampleml1-YYYYMMDD/ http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/YYYY/SUBM-sampleml1-YYYYMMDD/ http://www.w3.org/TR/YYYY/WDCRPRPERRECNOTESUBMRSCND-sampleml1-YYYYMMDD/http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/xgname/XGR-sampleml1-YYYYMMDD/
Latest version:
http://www.w3.org/Submission/sampleml1/ http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/sampleml1/ http://www.w3.org/TR/sampleml1/ http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/xgname/XGR-sampleml1/
Latest SampleML 1 version:
http://www.w3.org/TR/sampleml1
Latest SampleML Recommendation:
http://www.w3.org/TR/sample
Previous version:
Rescinds this Recommendation:
<previous version uri>
<"this version" URI of rescinded Recommendation>
Authors:
Nadia Coolpod (MyOrganization)
Dirk Silvertongue (Example.Com)

Please refer to the errata for this document, which may include some normative corrections.

This document is also available in these non-normative formats: ...links to formats here....

See also translations.


Abstract

....abstract text...

Status of this document

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of Final Incubator Group Reports is available. See also the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.

This is a First Public both a First Public Working Draft and a Last Call a Last Call Working Draft of "SampleML 1.0." "SampleML 1.0 (Second Edition)." "SampleML 1.1." The W3C Membership and other interested parties are invited to review the document and send comments to public-mailing-list@w3.org (with public archive) through DD Month YYYY.

W3C publishes a Candidate Recommendation to indicate that the document is believed to be stable and to encourage implementation by the developer community. The Sample Working Group expects to request that the Director advance this document to Proposed Recommendation once the Working Group has ...your PR entrance criteria here.... The Sample Working Group, working closely with the developer community, expects to show these implementations by ...estimate of when requirements will be fulfilled.... This estimate is based on the Working Group's preliminary implementation report. The Working Group expects to revise this report over the course of the implementation period. The Working Group does not plan to request to advance to Proposed Recommendation prior to DD Month YYYY.

The W3C Membership and other interested parties are invited to review the document and send comments to public-mailing-list@w3.org (with public archive) through DD Month YYYY. Advisory Committee Representatives should consult their WBS questionnaires. Note that substantive technical comments were expected during the Last Call review period that ended DD Month YYY.

Please see the Working Group's implementation report (...or a statement that no report was used as part of the Director's decision...).

The following features have been identified as "features at risk" by the Sample Working Group: ...list of features or link to list of features...

This Recommendation is an editorial revision of supersedes SampleML 1.0, which was published DD Month YYYY. ...State here what is expected of various audiences, such as authors, authoring tool developers, and user agent developers....

W3C has chosen to rescind the SampleML 1.0 Recommendation for the following reasons: ...list of reasons.... For additional information about replacement or alternative technologies, please refer to ...reference to information....

...Your custom paragraph here; see examples ... ...If the document was published due to a W3C decision to stop work on this material, include rationale for that decision...

This document was developed by the Sample Working Group. The Working Group expects to advance this Working Draft to Recommendation Status. A complete list of changes to this document is available. The list also indicates those changes that may affect conformance with respect to the Candidate Recommendation.

This document was developed by the Sample Incubator Group.

At the time of this publication, the most recent W3C Recommendation of SampleML 1.x is the DD Month YYYY SampleML 1.0 Recommendation.

...indicate the level of endorsement within the group Team for the material, set expectations that the group Team has completed work on the topics covered by the document, and set expectations about the group's Team's commitment to respond to comments about the document....

Please send comments about this document to public-mailing-list@w3.org (with public archive).

This document has been reviewed by W3C Members, by software developers, and by other W3C groups and interested parties, and is endorsed by the Director as a W3C Recommendation. It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited from another document. W3C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. This enhances the functionality and interoperability of the Web.

Publication as a an STATUS does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.

Publication of this document by W3C as part of the W3C Incubator Activity indicates no endorsement of its content by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any resources to the issues addressed by it. Participation in Incubator Groups and publication of Incubator Group Reports at the W3C site are benefits of W3C Membership.

This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. This document is governed by the 24 January 2002 CPP as amended by the W3C Patent Policy Transition Procedure. This document is governed by the 24 January 2002 CPP as amended by the W3C Patent Policy Transition Procedure. The group does not expect this document to become a W3C Recommendation. This document is informative only. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.
The disclosure obligations of the Participants of this group are described in the charter.
...Please contact the Communications Team for information about what text to include related to patent policy requirements...
...Incubator Groups have as a goal to produce work that can be implemented on a Royalty Free basis, as defined in the W3C Patent Policy. Please contact the Communications Team for information about what text to include related to patent policy requirements...

...Optional custom paragraph here...

By publishing this document, W3C acknowledges that the Submitting Members have made a formal Submission request to W3C for discussion. Publication of this document by W3C indicates no endorsement of its content by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any resources to the issues addressed by it. This document is not the product of a chartered W3C group, but is published as potential input to the W3C Process. A W3C Team Comment has been published in conjunction with this Member Submission. Publication of acknowledged Member Submissions at the W3C site is one of the benefits of W3C Membership. Please consult the requirements associated with Member Submissions of section 3.3 of the W3C Patent Policy. Please consult the complete list of acknowledged W3C Member Submissions.

Please consult the complete list of Team Submissions.

Table of Contents

...table of contents...

Ian Jacobs, W3C Head of Communications.
This document is based on contributions from Ian Jacobs, Matthieu Fuzellier, Dan Connolly, Chris Lilley, Hugo Haas, Dominique Hazaƫl-Massieux, Susan Lesch, Vivien Lacourba, and others. A filter is applied to the document source to provide specific views.
Created 3 Feb 2000.
$Id: 13-pubrules-src.html,v 1.617 2014-07-21 14:55:34 ijacobs Exp $