[template] Using "draft state" to mention Recommendation?

[plehegar]

[[
something which is probably more a systematic issue in the charter template: referring to a Recommendation for "draft state" is the deliverables list is awkward (since by definition a Recommendation is not a draft)
]]
w3c/strategy#481

from @dontcallmedom

[plehegar]

My two cents:

This doesn't come from the W3C Process. The goal is to point to where the most relevant and stable technical document is, mainly for the purpose of explaining the actual scope of the document. The document might be a specification already published by W3C, an editor's draft (if no there was previous publication), an explainer, a set of use cases, etc.

We could do s/Draft State/State/, with the understanding that it is not systematically linked to a W3C Maturity Level. For example, I can imagine we may prefer to link to an editor's draft instead of a Recommendation if the Editor's Draft contains a wider scope of work (like adding a substantial amount of new features).

[svgeesus]

I'm fine with State, or perhaps Document State.

[svgeesus]

I'm going to agree with @dontcallmedom and disagree with @plehegar because a related term does in fact come from the Process:

The title, stable URL, and publication date of the document that was used as the basis for its most recent Exclusion Opportunity as per the W3C Patent Policy [PATENT-POLICY]. (labeled “Exclusion Draft”);)

Process needs to update to say something like "Exclusion Document" and then we can change "Draft State" to "Dcoument State" in the charter template.