Introduction
+ ++ This document is intended to help Working Groups in deciding whether to + maintain a document using revised Candidate Recommendations or revised Recommendations. +
+W3C Process +
The W3C Process offers two ways to maintain a document on the Recommendation track:
+-
+
- Revising a Candidate Recommendation +
- + Candidate Recommendation Snapshots get similar patent commitments to W3C Recommendations but do not get + endorsed by W3C as standards for the Web. The document can be revised rapidly by publishing Candidate + Recommendation Drafts on a daily basis. + +
- Recommendations +
- + Recommendations are endorsed by W3C as standards for the Web. The document can be revised rapidly by publishing candidate + corrections/additions on a daily basis. + +
When should a Group keep a document as a Candidate Recommendation?
+ ++ A document is not ready to advance to Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply: +
+-
+
- Unresolved issues prevent any useful subset of the document moving forward +
- Insufficient test coverage to demonstrate adequate implementation experience +
- Inadequate implementation experience +
If technical issues remain unresolved for a long time, + solutions, the Working Group should consider moving the document to the Discontinued Draft status.
+ +When should a Group move to Recommendation?
++ As soon as it is ready. Unless one or more of the 3 conditions to remain in Candidate Recommendation are valid, a Working Group is strongly + encouraged to move forward to Recommendation. +
++ Getting to Recommendation is the only way to receive the full endorsement from the W3C for a technical specification. + Candidate Recommendations are not endorsed by W3C. +
+ +When should a Group keep a document as a Recommendation?
+ ++ A document remains in Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply: +
+-
+
- A meaningful/core subset of the document can be normative and received adequate implementation experience +
- Future corrections and improvements can be dealt through a revision of the Recommendation, including for new features +
Note: A Working Group should not move a specification to Proposed Recommendation without considering how to maintain/revise the future Recommendation.
+ +Ensuring the future of your Recommendation
++ Here are considerations to allow a Recommendation to be revised: +
+-
+
- Editorial updates can be made at any time on a Recommendation, without further review +
- Candidate corrections to make substantive changes can be made at any time on a Recommendation, without further review. Those candidate corrections are not considered normative. +
- Proposed corrections to make substantive changes can be made at any time on a Recommendation, but do trigger reviews. Those proposed corrections are not considered normative. +
- Similarly, if allowed by the Proposed Recommendation, candidate and proposed additions to add new features can be made at any time on a Recommendation +
- Once proper reviews are done, proposed corrections and proposed additions can be made normative. +
When should a Group move a Recommendation back to Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation?
+ ++ A document should be moved back to Working Draft or Candidate Recommendation if one or more of the conditions apply: +
+-
+
- The document was improperly moved to Recommendation +
+ plh@w3.org + +