Subject: [hybi] Fwd: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels [Was: Re: RfC: LCWD of Web Socket API; comment deadline October 21]

From: Arthur Barstow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:28:52 -0400

[ I meant to Cc the hybi list on the e-mail below which is my response 
to Julian's email archived at 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0084.html> ]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels [Was: Re: RfC: 
LCWD of Web Socket API; comment deadline October 21]
Resent-Date: 	Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:55:51 +0000
Resent-From: 	<[email-masked]>
Date: 	Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:55:08 -0400
From: 	ext Arthur Barstow <[email-masked]>
To: 	Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>, public-webapps 
<[email-masked]>

On 10/5/11 3:15 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote:
>  On 2011-09-29 18:28, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>>  On September 29, aLCWD of Web Sockets API was published:
>>
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-websockets-20110929/
>>
>>  Please send all comments to [email-masked] by October 21.
>
>  I just noted that as of yesterday, the API spec contains the custom
>  URI parsing algorithm that we removed from the protocol spec a long
>  time ago.
>
>  This was a post-LC change.
>
>  What's the Webapps WG's procedure to manage changes during LC?
Hi Julian, All - I changed the subject to reflect the general
process-related issue here. I will respond separately to the WebSocket
specifics ...

WebApps has always used the Edit First, Review Second process, as
documented in our [WorkMode] document.

Overall, I think the process has worked reasonably well, yet it can
create some challenges, especially as a spec enters the later maturity
levels i.e. LC and later.

For specs in LC or later, I think the Editor(s) should feel free to make
minor changes e.g. editorial changes and bug fixes that would not
invalidate an implementation, without any explicit notification to the
group. However, for major changes e.g. a new feature or a bug fix that
would affect an implementation, I think it is reasonable to expect the
Editor(s) to make some type of explicit notification and that could be
done via an e-mail, bug report, new issue (e.g. Tracker), etc.

Some groups have defined relatively detailed processes for handling
changes to specs at LC and later. My expectation is that everyone is
participating with the best of intentions, and as such, I would prefer
to not be overly prescriptive with the group's change process.

If others have additional or contrary thoughts about how the group
should handle spec changes for specs at LC or later, please speak up.

-Art Barstow

[WorkMode] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WorkMode