Skip to content

Initial stab at living CR/REC #151

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Initial stab at living CR/REC #151

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
15f93f3
Initial stab at living CR/REC
plehegar Sep 30, 2021
e7c25bc
Put more emphasis on Recommendation
plehegar Jan 14, 2022
7cd5387
Suggests moving back to Note track
plehegar Jan 14, 2022
e1a79cb
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Jan 20, 2022
97a2b2d
Consider moving it to Discontinued
plehegar Jan 25, 2022
602517f
Moving a REC back to WD or CR
plehegar Jan 25, 2022
6fe4d63
s/Insufficient adequate/Inadequate/
plehegar Feb 1, 2022
8699b84
Move to REC asap
plehegar Feb 1, 2022
cdd0850
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Feb 1, 2022
11f7539
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Feb 1, 2022
d04c482
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Feb 1, 2022
97beb2a
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Sep 2, 2022
d9fffd4
Update process/living-cr-rec.html
plehegar Sep 2, 2022
1984e80
One condition to move back to WD or CR
plehegar Sep 2, 2022
44f298f
Remove HTML comment
plehegar Sep 7, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
128 changes: 128 additions & 0 deletions process/living-cr-rec.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<title>Candidate Recommendation Snapshots and Recommendations</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../assets/main.css">
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
.toc li:hover {background: #EEC}
th, td {
border-bottom: 1px solid #999;}
td.command {width:35%;
border:none;
border-bottom: 1px solid #999;
background: white;}
td.help {
border:none;
border-bottom: 1px solid #999;
background: #efefef;
padding-left: 1em;}
dl.time,span.time {
border: 2px solid #C99;
background: #EE9; }
dl.time {
padding: 1em }
dl.time > dt:before {
content: "Time: "}
dl.tip {
padding: 1em }
dl.tip,span.tip {
border: 2px solid #9C9;
background: #BEB; }
dl.tip > dt:before {
content: "Tips: "}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="header"> <span class="logo"><a href="https://www.w3.org/"><img src="/Icons/WWW/w3c_home_nb"
alt="W3C" height="48" width="72"/></a></span>
<div class="breadcrumb"> <a href="https://www.w3.org/Guide/">The Art of
Consensus</a> →
<h1>Candidate Recommendation Snapshots and Recommendations</h1>
</div>
<p class="baseline">This <strong>Guidebook</strong> is the collected
wisdom of the W3C Group Chairs and other collaborators.</p>
</div>
<div class="main">
<h2 id="intro">Introduction</h2>

<p>
This document is intended to help Working Groups in deciding whether to
maintain a document using revised Candidate Recommendations or revised Recommendations.
</p>
<h2 id="process">W3C Process</h3>
<p>The W3C Process offers two ways to maintain a document on the Recommendation track:</p>
<dl>
<dt><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/#revising-cr">Revising a Candidate Recommendation</a></dt>
<dd>
Candidate Recommendation Snapshots get similar patent commitments to W3C Recommendations but do not get
endorsed by W3C as standards for the Web. The document can be revised rapidly by publishing Candidate
Recommendation Drafts on a daily basis.
</dd>
<dt><a href="https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/#revising-rec">Recommendations</a></dt>
<dd>
Recommendations are endorsed by W3C as standards for the Web. The document can be revised rapidly by publishing candidate
corrections/additions on a daily basis.
</dd>
</dl>

<h2 id="cr">When should a Group keep a document as a Candidate Recommendation?</h2>

<p>
A document is not ready to advance to Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply:
</p>
<ol>
<li>Unresolved issues prevent any useful subset of the document moving forward</li>
<li>Insufficient test coverage to demonstrate adequate implementation experience</li>
<li>Inadequate implementation experience</li>
</ol>

<p>If technical issues remain unresolved for a long time,
solutions, the Working Group should consider moving the document to the <a href='https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/#abandon-draft'>Discontinued Draft</a> status.</p>

<h2 id="cr">When should a Group move to Recommendation?</h2>
<p>
As soon as it is ready. Unless one or more of the 3 conditions to remain in Candidate Recommendation are valid, a Working Group is strongly
encouraged to move forward to Recommendation.
</p>
<p>
Getting to Recommendation is the only way to receive the full endorsement from the W3C for a technical specification.
<strong>Candidate Recommendations are not endorsed by W3C.</strong>
</p>

<h2 id="rec">When should a Group keep a document as a Recommendation?</h2>

<p>
A document remains in Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply:
</p>
<ol>
<li>A meaningful/core subset of the document can be normative and received adequate implementation experience</li>
<li>Future corrections and improvements can be dealt through a revision of the Recommendation, including for new features</li>
</ol>
<p>Note: A Working Group should not move a specification to Proposed Recommendation without considering how to maintain/revise the future Recommendation.</p>

<h3 id="rec_cons">Ensuring the future of your Recommendation</h3>
<p>
Here are considerations to allow a Recommendation to be revised:
</p>
<ul>
<li>Editorial updates can be made at any time on a Recommendation, without further review</li>
<li>Candidate corrections to make substantive changes can be made at any time on a Recommendation, without further review. Those candidate corrections are not considered normative.</li>
<li>Proposed corrections to make substantive changes can be made at any time on a Recommendation, but do trigger reviews. Those proposed corrections are not considered normative.</li>
<li>Similarly, if allowed by the Proposed Recommendation, candidate and proposed additions to add new features can be made at any time on a Recommendation</li>
<li>Once proper reviews are done, proposed corrections and proposed additions can be made normative.</li>
</ul>

<h2 id="rec">When should a Group move a Recommendation back to Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation?</h2>

<p>
A document should be moved back to Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply:
</p>
<ol>
<li>The document was improperly moved to Recommendation</li>
</ol>

<hr class="signed"/>
<address>[email protected]</address>
</body>
</html>