Hi All,
TL;DR: the process for evaluating normative references during Technical
Reports transitions is now defined in
<http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references>.
One of the parts of the Technical Reports advancement process is an
evaluation of a spec's normative references. This evaluation is done
during transitions such as moving from Last Call Working Draft to
Candidate Recommendation. The evaluation process previously used
"maturity" of a reference as the primary evaluation criteria (f.ex. to
advance to Recommendation, all normative refs had to be at least at the
Proposed Recommendation maturity level).
Philippe and Ralph Swick created a new document to describe the
evaluation process. Although the maturity of references is still a
consideration, it isn't the only factor. Here's a snippet of the high
level goals:
[[
<http://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references >
This document explains considerations the Director takes into account
when evaluating normative references from W3C documents at transitions
on theW3C Recommendation track
<http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#Reports>. These
considerations may be used by the Working Group while evaluating the
risk associated with specific design choices during the group's
deliberations. The Director may refer to this document when a transition
request is being decided.
At a high level, when a W3C specification has normative references to
other documents the Director considers 3 factors: stability, schedule
and licensing. Any of the factors described in this document are fodder
for Director consideration. No single factor is decisive. Different
cases will involve different combinations of these factors. The Director
may consider other factors not listed in this document as well; e.g. the
likelihood that W3C may wish to submit the Recommendation to ISO and the
PAS criteria for normative references.
]]
I encourage everyone, especially the Editors, to read this document. It
includes a relatively long list of questions that could be considered a
bit "daunting". However, I want to highlight something Ralph says below
-> "the W3C Director stresses that the document should not be
interpreted as a checklist of pass/fail criteria".
I think this document provides good clarifications regarding important
aspects of the evaluation process and provides useful guidelines (in the
form of questions) for the group to consider as a spec `matures`.
If you have any general comments, concerns, etc. regarding this
document, please send them to the public-w3process list. If your
comments are specific to this group (f.ex. "so, what does this mean for
WebApps") then I think this list would be fine for comments.
-Thanks, AB
On 10/18/13 1:37 PM, ext Ralph Swick wrote:
Philippe and I have worked with Tim to create a document describing
considerations the Director takes into account when evaluating normative
references in Recommendation Track documents.
https://www.w3.org/2013/09/normative-references
As you read this you will see that the maturity level of a document that
is normatively referenced is only one of many factors. The factors
described in this document can be interpreted as guidelines to advise a
Working Group as it is developing a specification. Tim stresses that
the document should not be interpreted as a checklist of pass/fail criteria.
We hope this document proves helpful to Working Groups throughout the
specification development process.
-Ralph and Philippe
with Tim Berners-Lee, Director
