Editorial Comments on Obsoleting or Rescinding a W3C Recommendation

From Revising W3C Process Community Group

Comments

6.9 Obsoleting or Rescinding a W3C Recommendation
 -------------
 I think some of the terminology could be simplified.
 * I suggest using the word "Restore" when referring to undoing
   a previous decision to rescind or obsolete a Rec.
 * I suggest avoiding "obsoletion" and "rescindment"; see
   concrete suggestions below.
 -------------
 "W3C may rescind a Recommendation, for example ..."
 "W3C may obsolete a Recommendation, for example "
 Please start with an introductory sentence to frame the
 discussion.
 Proposed:
  "From time to time, W3C may find it necessary to undo a
   Recommendation. W3C uses a similar process but different
   terminology to distinguish the severity of new advice
   - "Rescinded Recommendation": W3C no longer recommends
    this technology and is extremely unlikely to restore it.
   - "Obsoleted Recommendation": W3C no longer recommends
    this technology but there is a reasonable chance W3C
    could restore it.
  W3C might rescind a Recommendation when:
   * W3C concludes it contains many errors that conflict with a later
     version, or
   * W3C discovers burdensome patent claims that affect implementers
     and cannot be resolved; see the W3C Patent Policy [PUB33] and
     in particular section 5 (bullet 10) and section 7.5.
  W3C might obsolete a Recommendation when:
   * W3C concludes it no longer represents best practices, or
   * Industry has not adopted the technology and future
     adoption seems unlikely."
 -------------
  Proposed: Change
        "Obsoletion may be reversed, using the same process as for
         obsoleting a Recommendation, if for example a specification
         is later more broadly adopted."
     to:
         "W3C uses the same process for obsoleting or restoring a
         Recommendation."
     Note that you don't need to talk about the scenario since that's
     already listed earlier.
 -------------
  Proposed: Change
         "The Director must begin a review of a proposal to obsolete,
         un-obsolete or rescind a Recommendation when requested to do
         so by any of the following:"
     to:
         "The Director MUST begin a review of a proposal to obsolete,
         rescind, or restore a Recommendation when requested to do so
         by any of the following:"
 -------------
  Proposed: Change
        "Any individual who made a request to the relevant Working
        Group as described above, or the TAG if such a group does not
        exist, to consider a Recommendation for obsoletion or
        rescindment, whose request was not answered within 90 days"
    to:
        "Any individual who made a request to the relevant Working
        Group as described above, or to the TAG if no such group
        exists, to obsolete or rescind a Recommendation,
        whose request was not answered within 90 days"
 -------------
  Proposed: Change
        "indicate that this is a proposal to Rescind, Obsolete, or
        reverse the Obsoletion of, a Recommendation"
     to:
        "indicate that this is a proposal to Rescind, Obsolete, or
        Restore a Recommendation"
 -------------
  Proposed: Change
       "For any review of a proposal to obsolete or rescind a
       Recommendation the Director must:"
     to:
       "For any review of a proposal to obsolete, rescind, or
       restore a Recommendation the Director MUST:"
       Timeless: the "must" must be a RFC 2119 MUST

  Proposed: Change
        "publish a rationale for rescinding the Recommendation."
     to:
        "publish rationale for the proposal"
     (Since this process could be about obsolete and restore, too)
 All Accepted, at least in principle