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.

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

Jump to bottom

More explicitly connect ability to revise a REC to section detailing the process. #1008

Open
fantasai opened this issue Mar 26, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

More explicitly connect ability to revise a REC to section detailing the process. #1008

fantasai opened this issue Mar 26, 2025 · 1 comment
Labels
Agenda+ Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call

Comments

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-psig/2025JanMar/0009.html
AFAICT, this comment is about this paragraph:

After its initial publication, a W3C Recommendation may be revised to address editorial or substantive issues that are discovered later. However, new features can only be added if the document already identifies itself as intending to allow new features. Such an allowance cannot be added to a technical report previously published as a Recommendation that did not allow such changes; this requires a new technical report, that could, for example, be similarly named but with an incremented version number.

The hyperlink on "revise" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, we should probably use a more explicit cross-reference that makes it obvious that there are restrictions on how changes are made.
frivoal added a commit to frivoal/w3process that referenced this issue Mar 28, 2025
@frivoal
Make cross reference more obvious
79d3452 
The referenced section has a bunch of rules, it would not be good if
they were overlooked.

See w3c#1008
@frivoal frivoal mentioned this issue Mar 28, 2025
Merged
@frivoal frivoal added the Agenda+ Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call label Mar 28, 2025
@frivoal
Copy link
Collaborator

frivoal commented Mar 28, 2025

made #1010 to help with this

fantasai pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 6, 2025
@frivoal @fantasai
Make cross reference more obvious
192c853 
The referenced section has a bunch of rules, it would not be good if
they were overlooked.

See #1008
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Agenda+ Marks issues that are ready for discussion on the call
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@frivoal @fantasai