[evergreen] Need to be able to Rescind not-yet-REC REC-track documents

[fantasai]

Assuming we adopt an Evergreen-style patent policy, we will have documents which are not Recommendations but which do have royalty-free patent licensing commitments. We have the ability to “Rescind” Recommendations, which revokes the RF licensing commitments. (See W3C Patent Policy) We will need the ability to “Rescind” other things that are not yet Recommendations.

(Currently we just republish as a Note, which is a bit indistinct and will both be hard for the Patent Policy to hook into effectively. It will also hard for people to understand the patent implications of such a specification because a Note generally has no patent implications whereas this one would.)

[chaals]

minor technical point, we revoke the commitment to grant future licenses, but existing licenses granted are irrevocable and continue in effect.

[dwsinger]

Yes, I believe that we should (actually must) retain the ability to obsolete, declare superceded, and specifically rescind Evergreen specs.

[css-meeting-bot]

The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed #141 provide clearer/common wording for transitions to Obsolete/Superseded status #141.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<dsinger> topic: #141 provide clearer/common wording for transitions to Obsolete/Superseded status #141
<fantasai> github: https://github.com//issues/303
<fantasai> florian: Think we can close it
<fantasai> florian: Just says it's bad, but no wording proposed to fix it
<fantasai> cwilso: I can take ownership of this issue.

[frivoal]

agreed to close on Jan 29th call, as a separate Evergreen track is no longer being pursued.