ISSUE-45: Is the requirement that all errata should be addressed in an edited Recommendation too strong?

fix all the erratas

Is the requirement that all errata should be addressed in an edited Recommendation too strong?

State:

CLOSED

Product:

Document life cycle (pre 2014 chapter 7, now chapter 6)

Raised by:

Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile

Opened on:

2013-10-09

Description:

This issue was raised by Chris Lilley in email [1].

The basic question is whether it is important to clarify that while a group should address all errata before proposing an edited recommendation, they may propose an edited recommendation while there are outstanding errata in order to provide an improvement in the current Recommendation rather than an unnecessary dealy while the strive for perfection.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Oct/thread.html#msg21

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: Errata and Edited Recommendation [ISSUE-45] (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-10-10)
2. New Editor's draft, Chapter 7 (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-10-10)
3. Re: Errata and Edited Recommendation [ISSUE-45] (from chris@w3.org on 2013-10-10)
4. Re: Errata and Edited Recommendation (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-10-09)
5. w3process-ISSUE-45 (fix all the erratas): Is the requirement that all errata should be addressed in an edited Recommendation too strong? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-10-09)

Related notes:

Display change log