css-meeting-bot
commented
1 month ago The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed #862, and agreed to the following:
RESOLVED: Merge 862
The full IRC log of that discussion
<plh> subtopic: #862<plh> github: https://github.com/w3c/w3process/pull/862
<TallTed> RRSAgent, set logs public
<RRSAgent> I have made the request, TallTed
<cpn> Florian: It's a small change, further work will be needed
<cpn> ... People have said maintaining Recs is complicated and hard to understand
<cpn> ... This tries to make it easier to understand
<TallTed> RRSAgent, pointer?
<RRSAgent> See https://www.w3.org/2024/05/08-w3process-irc#T14-29-05
<cpn> .... Four classes of change are possible. The Process discusses how to discuss changing a Rec for each class
<cpn> ... For substantive changes and new features, it talks about folding in a candidate addition, but doesn't talk about how they're done
<plh> q+
<cpn> ... They're editorial notes, so follow that process. So this change reminds people how to do that
<cpn> PLH: PR seems fine. It also fixes a bug in the process
<cpn> ... Chairs still struggle with this. I can organise a TPAC breakout
<cpn> ... We haven't solved it from a tooling point of view
<cpn> Florian: That's why I started with the editorial bit
<plh> ack plh
<fantasai> RESOLVED: Merge 862
This change gives a little bit more context about how to make normative changes to a REC. Technically, and this is what the existing text talked about, they are made by folding in candidate amendments. However, someone just reading that section may not be aware of what candidate amendments are and how they are made to begin with.
This gives just a little bit of context to help people piece things together.
This is a (very) small step towards addressing https://github.com/w3c/w3process/issues/700
Preview | Diff