ISSUE-74: Must specs describe next steps?


Must specs describe next steps?

Document life cycle (pre 2014 chapter 7, now chapter 6)
Raised by:
Ian Jacobs
Opened on:
In Ian explains:

Because of the patent policy, it is important that readers know
whether a group expects a document to become a Recommendation or not.
Also, when a group has been chartered to produce a Recommendation
but then plans change, it is important that a document state the
new expectation.

The draft says that the status section "should include expectations
about next steps, and". I don't think that's strong enough as
stated. I think this should be a MUST to send clear signals relevant
to the patent policy.
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Minutes and summary of 3 February 2014 Chapter 7 Revision Task Force teleconference (from on 2014-02-04)
  2. [minutes] and summary of 27 January 2014 Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference (from on 2014-01-27)
  3. Re: w3process-ISSUE-74 (NeXtSteps?): Must specs describe next steps? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from on 2013-12-12)
  4. w3process-ISSUE-74 (NeXtSteps?): Must specs describe next steps? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from on 2013-12-12)

Related notes:

There has been support and no dissent, as far as I can tell...

Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile, 22 Jan 2014, 12:42:47

Resolved: change the SHOULD to MUST in identifying Next Steps.

Steve Zilles, 27 Jan 2014, 16:38:02

per Resolution: SHOULD changed to MUST in 7.2.5 in 2 February editor's draft

Steve Zilles, 3 Feb 2014, 16:13:36

Display change log ATOM feed

David Singer <>, Chair, Dominique Hazaƫl-Massieux <>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <>.
$Id: 74.html,v 1.1 2020/03/09 13:50:16 carcone Exp $