ISSUE-79: Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication
Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Ian Jacobs
- Opened on:
- 2013-12-13
- Description:
- Comment on 6 Dec 2013 chapter 7:
"If 6 months elapse without significant changes to a specification a
Working Group should publish a revised Working Draft, whose status
section should indicate reasons for the lack of change."
If groups are finding it not worth their time to publish, asking
them to publish may not have the desired effect. I propose instead
that the WG SHOULD send a status update to the webmaster and request
that the Webmaster update the most recent draft IN PLACE with the status
update.
Charles commented that "if publsihing is painful we should fix that."
If the group should be publishing but they consider it painful, yes we should fix that.
But if the group has some reason for NOT publishing, it makes no sense to require them to publish. Clearly just adding 2 sentences of status update will be useful and sufficient.
- 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)
- Re: Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-02-03)
- Re: Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-02-03)
- Agenda for Chapter 7 Task Force Telcon, 8AM Pacific, 11AM Eastern, 3 February (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-02-02)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-79: Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-16)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-79: Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication (from ij@w3.org on 2013-12-13)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-79: Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-13)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2013-12-13)
- w3process-ISSUE-79: Don't require republication after 6 months of no publication (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-12-13)
- Re: Comments on 6 December 2013 Chapter 7 draft (from ij@w3.org on 2013-12-12)
Related notes:
CLOSED with no change to this document. It is proposed (by the Team) that if the only change to a document is to update its status, indicating why there has been no update in 6 months, then Pubrules would allow that to be done in place without generating a new TR.
Steve Zilles, 3 Feb 2014, 16:31:40Display change log
