ISSUE-74: Must specs describe next steps?
NeXtSteps?
Must specs describe next steps?
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Document life cycle (pre 2014 chapter 7, now chapter 6)
- Raised by:
- Ian Jacobs
- Opened on:
- 2013-12-12
- Description:
- In http://www.w3.org/mid/CFE36B99-1937-41DD-999B-7F9A6B4C22ED@w3.org 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:
- Minutes and summary of 3 February 2014 Chapter 7 Revision Task Force teleconference (from coralie@w3.org on 2014-02-04)
- [minutes] and summary of 27 January 2014 Revising W3C Process Community Group Teleconference (from coralie@w3.org on 2014-01-27)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-74 (NeXtSteps?): Must specs describe next steps? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-12)
- w3process-ISSUE-74 (NeXtSteps?): Must specs describe next steps? [Document life cycle (ch 7)] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org 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, 12:42:47Resolved: change the SHOULD to MUST in identifying Next Steps.
Steve Zilles, 27 Jan 2014, 16:38:02per Resolution: SHOULD changed to MUST in 7.2.5 in 2 February editor's draft
Steve Zilles, 3 Feb 2014, 16:13:36Display change log