Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Retire Proposed Recommendation #868

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

frivoal
Copy link
Collaborator

@frivoal frivoal commented May 13, 2024

As discussed in #861, the Proposed Recommendation phase of the REC track exists only to support an AC Review during the transition of a document from CR to REC. We can simplify the Process a good deal by doing away with Proposed Recommendation entirely, and doing the AC Review on the CR that we want to promote to REC. Then, if the AC Review is successful (in addition to the other criteria), we could publish the REC directly.

This Pull Request does just that. It keeps all the criteria that were present at the CR→PR transition, as well those of the PR→REC transition, and combines them into a CR→REC transition.

This allows for a simplification of terminology, a simplification of Process text, a reduction in the number of states described in the REC track diagram, and a reduction of work needed by the WG and the Team (one transition to request instead of two, one less publication to make); all without any changes about what is expected of a Recommendation.


Preview | Diff

Proposed Recommendation is only a transitional phase. Nothing stays
there: either the transition is approved and the spec goes to REC, or
it's not and it reverts to a lower maturity. The things that happen
during PR are useful, but they don't really depend on there being an
explicit phase with an explicit publication, so we can simplify things
by folding all of this into the transition from CR to REC, without a
distinct phase.

Part of w3c#861
@chaals
Copy link
Contributor

chaals commented May 13, 2024

Looks like a good draft (on a skim of the github diff rather than a very careful review, so faar).

Copy link
Member

@TallTed TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Editorial language improvements.

index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
frivoal and others added 5 commits May 14, 2024 13:17
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
@frivoal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

frivoal commented May 14, 2024

Editorial language improvements.

All accepted. Thanks!

@frivoal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

frivoal commented Jun 21, 2024

From the AB's last meeting:

RESOLUTION: The AB is interested in pursuing the retirement of the Proposed Recommendation Phase, and asks the Process CG to work out the details.

@frivoal frivoal added Agenda+ Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call and removed Needs AB Feedback Advisory Board Input needed labels Jun 21, 2024
@frivoal frivoal marked this pull request as ready for review June 21, 2024 01:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Agenda+ Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call Needs Review Topic: Simplifications
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants