From f7a7617f6caeec712fd97ea78e49655bc14c44ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Florian Rivoal Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 16:23:46 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Allow new features in all Recommendations Remove the opt-in distinction between Recommendations that "allow new features" and those that don't, so that we may have a single type of Recommendations. The distinction and the related procedural steps were a frequent source of confusion. Part of addressing https://github.com/w3c/AB-memberonly/issues/244 --- index.bs | 78 +++++++++++++++++++------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) diff --git a/index.bs b/index.bs index 9aba2976..c878e8a4 100644 --- a/index.bs +++ b/index.bs @@ -3635,15 +3635,6 @@ Maturity Stages on the Recommendation Track (in accordance with [[#revising-rec]]) to address [=editorial change|editorial=] or [=substantive change|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. - Adding or removing this allowance is a [=substantive change=]. - 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=] - (which could, for example, be similarly named but with an incremented version number). As technology evolves, a [=W3C Recommendation=] may become: @@ -4161,20 +4152,10 @@ Requirements for Transition must identify, in the document, where errata are tracked. - Additionally, - if the document has previously been published as a [=W3C Recommendation=], the [=Working Group=] - must not include any class 4 change - to that publication - unless it was explicitly marked as [=allowing new features=], - and must not include any such marking - if not already present. - If the document's most recent publication is a [=Candidate Recommendation Draft=], the [=Team=] must verify that it contains no changes since the previous [=Candidate Recommendation Snapshot=] other than: * [=editorial changes=], - * the addition or removal of a statement as to whether the document will [=allow new features=] - after its publication as a [=Recommendation=]. * dropping [=at risk=] features Otherwise, the [=Working Group=] must republish it @@ -4255,18 +4236,19 @@ Revising a Recommendation: Editorial Changes to make this class of change without passing through earlier maturity stages. (See class 1 and class 2 changes.) -
+
Revising a Recommendation: Substantive Changes
- Tentative corrections (see class 3 changes) + Tentative [=substantive changes=] + (see class 3 and class 4 changes.) may be annotated into a [=Recommendation=] - using [=candidate corrections=]. + using [=candidate amendments=]. - Note: [=Candidate corrections=] do not normatively modify the document; + Note: [=Candidate amendments=] do not normatively modify the document; they editorially indicate how one might do so. They are therefore published following the provisions of [[#revised-rec-editorial]]. - A [=candidate correction=] can be made normative + A [=candidate amendment=] can be made normative and be folded into the main text of the [=Recommendation=], once it has satisfied all the same criteria as the rest of the [=Recommendation=], @@ -4283,30 +4265,19 @@ Revising a Recommendation: Substantive Changes or, if the relevant criteria are fulfilled, publish as a Candidate Recommendation-- and advance the specification from that state. - (See class 3 changes.) - -
-Revising a Recommendation: New Features
- - For [=Recommendations=] explicitly identified as [=allow new features|allowing new features=], - tentative new features (see class 4 changes) - may be added as [=candidate additions=] in annotations, - and class 4 changes may be normatively incorporated - in the same fashion as class 3 changes in [[#revised-rec-substantive]]. - - Note: Limiting the addition of new features to [=Recommendations=] that explicitly allow them - enables third parties to depend on a stable feature-set for [=Recommendations=] that do not advertise that ability, - as was the case for all [=Recommendations=] prior to the 2020 revision of this Process. - - Note: When a [=Recommendation=] does not [=allow new features=], - new features can be added by creating a new [=technical report=] - and following the full process of advancing that [=technical report=] to [=Recommendation=]-- - beginning with a new [=First Public Working Draft=]. - Such [=technical reports=] could be written to represent - additional modules building on top of the original [=Recommendation=] of the core technology, - or an expanded replacement of the original [=Recommendation=] of the core technology - (in which case the new [=technical report=] will typically have the same name as the original, - with an incremented version number). + +
+ Note: + In earlier version of the Process, + new features (class 4 changes) could only be added to [=Recommendations=] + that had explicitly opted into this ability + prior to their first publication as [=Recommendation=]. + Otherwise, + new features could only be added by creating a new [=technical report=] + and following the full process of advancing that [=technical report=] to [=Recommendation=]-- + beginning with a new [=First Public Working Draft=]. + For simplicity, this restriction has been lifted. +
Incorporating Candidate Amendments
@@ -4345,10 +4316,6 @@ Incorporating Candidate Amendments Also, the review initiated by the [=Last Call for Review of Proposed Amendments=] is an [=Advisory Committee Review=]. - Note: [=Last Call for Review of Proposed Additions=] and - [=Last Call for Review of Proposed Corrections and Additions=] - can only be issued for [=Recommendations=] that [=allow new features=]. - A [=Working Group=] may batch multiple [=proposed amendments=] into a single Last Call for Review of Proposed Amendments. To facilitate review, @@ -5469,6 +5436,13 @@ Appendix A: Retired Terminology
Last defined in section 2.2 of the 2014 Process, now called [=CEO=]. + +
+ Allow new features + (retired term) +
+ Last defined in section 6.3.1 of the 2025 Process. + See also the note at the end of [[#revised-rec-substantive]].

From 5410f8a96045b48d0651a87be9b726d5f43c55ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Florian Rivoal Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 16:41:04 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] Stop distinguishing between different types of Last Call for Review This these are now proceduraly interchangeable and valid in the same situations, formal distinction is no longer necessary. Informal descriptions of the nature of the changes remain possible, but are no longer mandated by the Process. Part of addressing https://github.com/w3c/AB-memberonly/issues/244 --- index.bs | 18 +++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/index.bs b/index.bs index c878e8a4..0b6378d8 100644 --- a/index.bs +++ b/index.bs @@ -4290,12 +4290,6 @@ Incorporating Candidate Amendments

must be announced to other W3C groups, the public, and the [=Advisory Committee=]. The announcement must: