ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD
Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Ian Jacobs
- Opened on:
- 2013-12-13
- Description:
- "W3C must publish any unfinished specifications on the
Recommendation track as Working Group Notes. "
I suggest we change that to SHOULD. The sentence that follows says
SHOULD for a different scenario:
"If a Working group decides, or the Director requires, the Working
Group to discontinue work on a technical report before completion,
the Working Group should publish the document as a Working Group
Note."
It is not clear to me that the rationale of "closing the group" is
materially different from any other piece of rationale the Director
might have.
Charles replied:
"This has been discussed before (in an AB meeting before we made the discussion open). The rationale for the difference is that there is no effective way to require a Working Group to publish a Note shelving their work, especially in the case where they have been told to shut down. But it is feasible, and IMHO reasonable, to insist that W3C team do it."
The fact that the Team can do it does not increase the importance of doing it. If it was not important enough for us to make it a MUST requirement on WGs, I don't see why anybody else should have a MUST requirement.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2014-02-11)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from szilles@adobe.com on 2014-02-10)
- 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-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-16)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from ij@w3.org on 2013-12-13)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (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)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2013-12-13)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from ij@w3.org on 2013-12-13)
- Re: w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (from chaals@yandex-team.ru on 2013-12-13)
- w3process-ISSUE-80: Publishing Note to end unfinished REC should only be SHOULD (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:
Discussion on 3 February, noted that the current text in the 2 February editor's draft covered the cases that were actually likely to occur in practice. For example, we have never had the Director tell a WG to stop work on a given piece of work so how this needs to be handled is not very important.
Steve Zilles, 3 Feb 2014, 16:50:10I believe this was explicitly closed by the Task Force (we've been around it a few times).
Charles 'chaals' (McCathie) Nevile, 14 Feb 2014, 21:59:30Display change log
