From 36fc25b6d237624366a7d9c5d4ca411c290bc38a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philippe Le Hegaret Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:45:02 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Process pp links (#240) Fixes #237 --- chair/role.html | 10 ++++---- council/council.html | 14 +++++------ editor/editors-draft.html | 2 +- editor/index.html | 2 +- incubation.html | 2 +- index.html | 12 +++++----- meetings/continuity.html | 2 +- meetings/organize.html | 6 ++--- ...elected-body-communication-guidelines.html | 6 ++--- participant/group.html | 4 ++-- participant/resources.html | 2 +- process/ac-appeal.html | 4 ++-- process/adv-notice.html | 5 ++-- process/alternate-ac.html | 2 +- process/binding-license.html | 12 +++++----- process/charter.html | 16 ++++++------- process/closing-wg.html | 8 +++---- process/joint-deliverables.html | 2 +- process/non-participant-commitment.md | 2 +- process/obsolete-rescinded-supserseded.html | 8 +++---- process/predicting-milestones.html | 24 +++++++++---------- process/suspension.html | 6 ++--- process/tilt/normative-references.html | 4 ++-- teamcontact/liaison-role.html | 2 +- teamcontact/role.html | 8 +++---- 25 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 83 deletions(-) diff --git a/chair/role.html b/chair/role.html index 04998450..aac8c1b3 100644 --- a/chair/role.html +++ b/chair/role.html @@ -29,11 +29,11 @@

Related Resources

The W3C Team appoints (or re-appoints) a Chair (or more than one co-Chair) for every Working Group and Interest Group ("Group"). The Chair's primary role is to -facilitate consensus-building among Group members. The Chair works together with +facilitate consensus-building among Group members. The Chair works together with the W3C Staff Contact. Key roles of the Group Chair are listed below. Additional information on the role of the -Group Chair is in the W3C Process +Group Chair is in the W3C Process Document.

Chair Buddy System

The Working Group effectiveness Task Force helped establish a Chair Buddy System by which experienced buddy-mentors help buddy-mentees.

@@ -41,14 +41,14 @@

Chair Buddy System

Role of the Group Chair

Creates Group charter and convenes Group

Bert Bos's essay on W3C's design principles and Tim Berners-Lee's essentials of a specification may also be a useful reading.

During the internal development of a specification, make sure to distinguish official drafts from internal ones using the style for Group-internal Drafts.

diff --git a/incubation.html b/incubation.html index 5097fffe..45c8adca 100644 --- a/incubation.html +++ b/incubation.html @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@

Member Submission

and if royalty-free commitments to known patents are made along with the submission.

-

+

W3C Workshop

diff --git a/index.html b/index.html index 0d5e3b98..a564a0ed 100644 --- a/index.html +++ b/index.html @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@

Specification Development

  • Advancement on the Recommendation Track:
    • W3C Process for Busy People
      • -
    • Section 6.3 Technical +
    • Section 6.3 Technical Reports of the W3C Process
    • Considerations for joint deliverables
    • Transition requirements for all W3C @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@

      Reference

      Patent Policy

      Process

      Note on Member Submissions: Per section + href="/policies/process/#SubmissionScope">section "Scope of Member Submissions" of the Process Document, "when a technology overlaps in scope with the work of a chartered Working Group, Members SHOULD participate in the Working Group and contribute the @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@

      Roles

      Author, Contributor Policies
    • team contact's role
    • Liaison's role. Note: - Per section "Liaisons" of + Per section "Liaisons" of the Process Document, liaisons MUST be coordinated by the Team due to requirements for public communication; patent, copyright, and other IPR policies; confidentiality agreements; and mutual membership @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@

      Historical

      About the Guidebook

      This Guidebook is intended to complement the W3C - Membership Agreement and the W3C + Membership Agreement and the W3C Process. This index page is Public, although a small number of resources linked from this page may be visible only to the W3C Membership or Team.

      diff --git a/meetings/continuity.html b/meetings/continuity.html index ef45ecd6..dc9bf9fe 100644 --- a/meetings/continuity.html +++ b/meetings/continuity.html @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@

      Selecting a video conferencing service

      W3C Workshops

      - We continue to conduct fully distributed workshops with virtual presence sessions. + We continue to conduct fully distributed workshops with virtual presence sessions. We are adapting the existing model (program committee issues call for participation and invites presentations based on submitted position statements) and experiment with new models. In any format, materials should be posted and archived accessibly. Participants should be notified of plans for audio/video recording and confidentiality level. diff --git a/meetings/organize.html b/meetings/organize.html index c3207b52..b78166f5 100644 --- a/meetings/organize.html +++ b/meetings/organize.html @@ -53,10 +53,10 @@

      On This Page → 

      Dealing with timezones

      -
      +

      A distributed meeting is one where most of the attendees are expected to participate from remote locations (e.g., by telephone, video conferencing, or IRC).

      -

      — W3C Process Document

      +

      — W3C Process Document

      A Chair should build consensus about the time slots for distributed meetings and should reevaluate that consensus on a regular basis. A good practice is to re-evaluate at the semi-annual spring and fall shifts in daylight saving time, and upon significant changes in membership or participation. @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@

      Dealing with timezones

      a decision.
    -

    The W3C Process +

    The W3C Process provides rules about the timing of meeting announcements and agenda publication.

    • diff --git a/other/elected-body-communication-guidelines.html b/other/elected-body-communication-guidelines.html index e260b88c..d7d783de 100644 --- a/other/elected-body-communication-guidelines.html +++ b/other/elected-body-communication-guidelines.html @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@

    Guidelines for communicating as a member of a W3C elected body

    Nearby

    • - W3C Process Document + W3C Process Document
    • W3C Code of Conduct @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@

      Nearby

      W3C elected bodies

      -

      The AB and the TAG are defined in the W3C Process, as are the rules of participation for both groups.

      +

      The AB and the TAG are defined in the W3C Process, as are the rules of participation for both groups.

      W3C values and behaviours

      @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@

      Communication guidelines

      As the W3C process says:

      -
      Advisory Board and TAG participants have a special role within W3C. They are elected by the membership and appointed by the Team with the expectation that they will use their best judgement to find the best solutions for the web, not just for any network, technology, vendor, or user.
      +
      Advisory Board and TAG participants have a special role within W3C. They are elected by the membership and appointed by the Team with the expectation that they will use their best judgement to find the best solutions for the web, not just for any network, technology, vendor, or user.

      As leaders within the W3C community, the opinions of members of elected bodies carry particular weight, whether they are expressed within our community or elsewhere.

      diff --git a/participant/group.html b/participant/group.html index 6ba13aed..e91b59e4 100644 --- a/participant/group.html +++ b/participant/group.html @@ -150,12 +150,12 @@

      GitHub

      W3C Process

      Patent Policy

      diff --git a/participant/resources.html b/participant/resources.html index 35add57b..280b2e95 100644 --- a/participant/resources.html +++ b/participant/resources.html @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@

      GitHub

      Patent Policy (especially for WGs)

      diff --git a/process/ac-appeal.html b/process/ac-appeal.html index 84ff3398..3fde21b8 100644 --- a/process/ac-appeal.html +++ b/process/ac-appeal.html @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@

      Appealing a W3C Decision

      Nearby

      @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@

      Nearby

      The W3C process document allows Advisory Committee representatives to - initiate an Advisory + initiate an Advisory Committee Appeal. This document provides an email template to start the appeal.

      diff --git a/process/adv-notice.html b/process/adv-notice.html
index e36872c2..53b3a63b 100644
--- a/process/adv-notice.html
+++ b/process/adv-notice.html
@@ -7,7 +7,6 @@
 
 
 
-
 
 
 
@@ -24,7 +23,7 @@ 
      How to send advance notice of work
      to the Advisory Committee

      This document describes the Strategy Team's implementation of -the Process +the Process Document requirements related to advance notice to the Advisory Committee of charters in development. See the background for the advance notice policy and @@ -109,7 +108,7 @@

      Sending advance notice to the Advisory Committee

      Background for this document

      -

      The Process Document requirements for +

      The Process Document requirements for advance notice were introduced in response to requests from Members to be more in the loop earlier for work in development. These requirements were added to provide additional transparency to diff --git a/process/alternate-ac.html b/process/alternate-ac.html index f479848a..ee470509 100644 --- a/process/alternate-ac.html +++ b/process/alternate-ac.html @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@

      Alternate Advisory Committee Representatives

      Nearby

      diff --git a/process/binding-license.html b/process/binding-license.html index 9f1b23f3..2eecaec5 100644 --- a/process/binding-license.html +++ b/process/binding-license.html @@ -39,20 +39,20 @@

      Also On This Page → 

      Some Working Groups define API definitions, with examples and are still using the W3C document +href="https://www.w3.org/copyright/document-license-2023/">W3C document license.

      If you include WebIDL definitions, examples, code samples, the document -license states (as of February 1st, 2015):

      +href="https://www.w3.org/copyright/document-license-2023/">document +license states (as of January 1st, 2023):

      -

      In addition, "Code Components" — Web IDL in sections clearly marked as Web IDL; and W3C-defined markup (HTML, CSS, etc.) and computer programming language code clearly marked as code examples— are licensed under the W3C Software License.

      +cite="https://www.w3.org/copyright/document-license-2023/"> +

      In addition, "Code Components" — Web IDL in sections clearly marked as Web IDL; and W3C-defined markup (HTML, CSS, etc.) and computer programming language code clearly marked as code examples— are licensed under the W3C Software License.

      -

      The W3C Software License is listed at the Open Source Initiative.

      +

      The W3C Software License is listed at the Open Source Initiative.

      Feedback is to @w3c/guidebook diff --git a/process/charter.html b/process/charter.html index 002391c8..19adb766 100644 --- a/process/charter.html +++ b/process/charter.html @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@

      Tools and templates

      The W3C Process describes -the lifecycle +the lifecycle of chartered groups. At a high level, W3C approves a new Working Group or Interest Group charter after a series of reviews intended to improve the quality of the charter and generate interest in the @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@

      Strategy Team role

      Let the proponents know if the charter is not well-formed (per the template and per Process section "content of a chartera>"); if it is perceived to be harmful to the Web; or if it is not a priority at the current time.
      Request advance notice to AC
      If and when satisfied with the charter, raise awareness by requesting that the W3C Communications Team send an advance notice to the W3C Advisory Committee; for details see +href="/policies/process/#WGCharterDevelopment">advance notice to the W3C Advisory Committee; for details see how to send advance notice of work to the Advisory Committee. Record in the pipeline issue that advance notice has been sent. @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@

      Strategy Team role

      • Charter changes: Horizontal and other reviews may result in changes to the charter, or to objections. The charter shepherd should note in the request to TiLT the horizontal review status (including completed reviews and any timeouts).
        • -
      • Chairs: Per the W3C Process the W3C Team appoints Working and Interest Group Chairs. It is the responsibility of the charter shepherd to propose one or more Chairs in the request for TiLT approval.
        • +
      • Chairs: Per the W3C Process the W3C Team appoints Working and Interest Group Chairs. It is the responsibility of the charter shepherd to propose one or more Chairs in the request for TiLT approval.
      Request approval from TiLT
      @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@

      Advisory Committee Review

      Once the AC Review is underway, monitor responses and manage any Formal Objections. Ensure that the charter receives sufficient support from the Membership.
      Timing:
        -
      • Per the W3C Process, the review period is at least 28 days.
        • +
      • Per the W3C Process, the review period is at least 28 days.
      • Any Advisory Committee representative may request an extended review period of any new or substantively modified Working Group charter as part of their response to the Call for Review. In this case the existing charter may need to be extended (see extension template). In case of extended review period, the Team must ensure that the Call for Participation for the work group occurs at least 60 days after the Call for Review of its charter.
      • The handling of Formal Objections to a charter adds more time.
      @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@

      Existing groups

      Request for short-term extension

      -

      The W3C Process describes the charter extensions and when they may occur. No Advisory Committee review is required for short-term extensions. Since 2015, the Team has adopted a policy on group charter end dates: a charter may only be extended without AC review for six months or less, otherwise it must recharter.

      +

      The W3C Process describes the charter extensions and when they may occur. No Advisory Committee review is required for short-term extensions. Since 2015, the Team has adopted a policy on group charter end dates: a charter may only be extended without AC review for six months or less, otherwise it must recharter.

      For a short-term extension, the charter shepherd roles are:

      @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@

      Request for rechartering

      The group should discuss and record a formal decision to request extension or to recharter.
      Follow process for creating a charter
      The handling of rechartering is almost the same as for new charters. Note that, in addition to any content changes, the charter may need to be updated if the charter template has changed. Furthermore, the template tool will prompt for the inclusion of Patent Policy language and otherwise help you meet the - list of charter requirements in the Process. For existing groups, the charter assistant helps in producing the list of exclusion drafts. + list of charter requirements in the Process. For existing groups, the charter assistant helps in producing the list of exclusion drafts.
      @@ -292,10 +292,10 @@

      Organizing the Call for Review

      1. A w3.org URI to the proposed charter (not a github.io URI). This charter is public, and must not be altered, during the AC review.
      2. The list of significant changes to a revised charter - (per "Advisory Committee Review of a Working Group or Interest Group Charter" of the Process Document). It is useful to include a diff between the current and proposed charters (you may wish to use the "Advisory Committee Review of a Working Group or Interest Group Charter" of the Process Document). It is useful to include a diff between the current and proposed charters (you may wish to use the HTML diff tool).
      3. In case of renewal of an existing charter, whether the group scope has changed. I.e., are there any new deliverables with licensing obligations under the W3C Patent Policy? The current group participants would need to re-join the group once the revised charter is approved.
        4. -
      4. A recommended review start date and duration (at least 28 days according to the process document)
        5. +
      5. A recommended review start date and duration (at least 28 days according to the process document)
      6. A URI to the review of the proposed charter in the Strategy GitHub repository.
      7. The name of the Team-only mailing list for comments.
      diff --git a/process/closing-wg.html b/process/closing-wg.html index 7eb86b99..7d9c94bc 100644 --- a/process/closing-wg.html +++ b/process/closing-wg.html @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@

      How to close a work Group

      Introduction

      The W3C Process describes -the lifecycle +the lifecycle of chartered groups. At a high level, W3C closes a work Group once it has completed its work. @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@

      Early closure

      PAG outcome
      -
      A Patent Advisory Group has determined +
      A Patent Advisory Group has determined that essential claims exist which cannot be circumvented; so it will not be possible to create a Recommendation which can be freely implemented under the @@ -103,14 +103,14 @@

      Early closure

      A proposal to close a Group before the end of its chartered term must be explained. An Advisory Committee review takes place and, if that confirms that the group should be closed, - a W3C Decision announces closure of the group. + a W3C Decision announces closure of the group.

      Note that, if the Group has Recommendation-track specifications in development, and they have not yet reached W3C Recommendation status, closing the group - + terminates Disclosure Obligations for those specifications.

      diff --git a/process/joint-deliverables.html b/process/joint-deliverables.html index 0decb886..a40dca87 100644 --- a/process/joint-deliverables.html +++ b/process/joint-deliverables.html @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@

      Joint deliverables

      Nearby

      • - W3C Process Document + W3C Process Document
      • Charter Creation diff --git a/process/non-participant-commitment.md b/process/non-participant-commitment.md index 49ba045f..dd028767 100644 --- a/process/non-participant-commitment.md +++ b/process/non-participant-commitment.md @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -This is Team guidance for implementation of [Process 6.2.6](https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/#contributor-license). If you have any IPR questions, and for substantial contributions, please contact [team-legal](mailto:team-legal @ w3.org). +This is Team guidance for implementation of [Process 6.2.6](/policies/process/#contributor-license). If you have any IPR questions, and for substantial contributions, please contact [team-legal](mailto:team-legal @ w3.org). When a non-member (or not-yet-identified member) makes a pull request contribution to a W3C Working Group repository, the repository manager tool flags it for review and sends them an email with [this text](https://github.com/w3c/ash-nazg/blob/master/templates/affiliation-mail.txt) to the contributor, chairs, and team contacts. diff --git a/process/obsolete-rescinded-supserseded.html b/process/obsolete-rescinded-supserseded.html index 2d5da9eb..669bd792 100644 --- a/process/obsolete-rescinded-supserseded.html +++ b/process/obsolete-rescinded-supserseded.html @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@

        Also On This Page →

        Nearby

        • - W3C Process Document + W3C Process Document
        • W3C Editors homepage @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@

          If the W3C community discovers at a later date that the reasons for superseding a specification are no longer valid, the process may be reversed.

          -

          More information on the process for superseding a specification can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          +

          More information on the process for superseding a specification can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          If you think that a specification has been superseded in error, please contact the W3C.

          @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@

          If the W3C community discovers at a later date that the reasons for a specification becoming obsolete are no longer valid, the process may be reversed.

          -

          More information on the process for making a specification obsolete can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          +

          More information on the process for making a specification obsolete can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          If you think that a specification has been made obsolete in error, please contact the W3C.

          @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@

          When a specification has been rescinded, it is no longer used and no new licenses are granted under the W3C Patent Policy.

          -

          More information on the process for rescinding a specification can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          +

          More information on the process for rescinding a specification can be found in section 6.9 of the W3C Process.

          If you think that a specification has been rescinded in error, please contact the W3C.

          diff --git a/process/predicting-milestones.html b/process/predicting-milestones.html index b31c14b8..07b15064 100644 --- a/process/predicting-milestones.html +++ b/process/predicting-milestones.html @@ -87,8 +87,8 @@

          Aims and Scope

          Reading this document

          While the technical work undertaken by W3C is very diverse and hard to generalize, non-technical aspects such as required review periods - mandated by the Process Document [PROCESS] - or the W3C Patent Policy [W3CPP] + mandated by the Process Document [PROCESS] + or the W3C Patent Policy [W3CPP] are common to all work. The main focus of this document is therefore on the required periods of time needed for the non-technical work. Understanding these avoids producing initial milestones which are @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@

          Preparatory work

          an initial charter. In this phase, an idea is firmed up from "hey we could do this" to a fully fledged, chartered Working Group. If the work is entirely new, or would take an existing group in a radical new - direction, the Process Document requires + direction, the Process Document requires that Advance Notice be sent to the AC. Often, an initial draft charter is sent along with this notice (but this is not required). The aim here is to avoid surprises, to quickly gather brainstorming-type feedback, @@ -182,7 +182,7 @@

          Preparatory work

      Once review comments from W3M have been incorporated into the charter, - it is sent + it is sent to the AC for review.

      AC review
      @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@

      Starting the Group

      Once the decision to start the Working Group has been communicated to the AC, participants can join. This may take some time, particularly if participants need to perform a legal review of the work items (for - example, to review their patent portfolio in light of the W3C + example, to review their patent portfolio in light of the W3C Royalty-Free commitment). In the case of a new group, some or all of the participants may be unfamiliar with W3C processes, tools (such as IRC, phone conferencing, issue tracking, version control). The Chair and @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@

      Starting the Group

      First f2f meeting
      -

      There is a set minimum period of eight +

      There is a set minimum period of eight weeks for announcement of a face to face meeting.

      @@ -312,7 +312,7 @@

      First Public Working Draft

      Exclusion period for FPWD

      Announcement of an open exclusion period, immediately after - publication of FPWD, triggers an exlusion + publication of FPWD, triggers an exlusion period of 150 days.

      @@ -443,8 +443,8 @@

      Transition to CR

      comments have been handled, your Group can request a transition to Candidate Recommendation. At that meeting, besides checking the responses and looking for outstanding disagreement, you will be asked - which features - are at risk, what the CR exit criteria are, and to give a mimimum + which features + are at risk, what the CR exit criteria are, and to give a mimimum time for CR. The purpose of that minimum time is to allow other implementers, perhaps unknown to the group, to contribute their implementation feedback.

      @@ -487,7 +487,7 @@

      Transition to CR

      Exclusion period for Candidate Recommendation

      Announcement of an open exclusion period, immediately after - publication of Candidate Recommendation, triggers an exclusion period of 60 + publication of Candidate Recommendation, triggers an exclusion period of 60 days.

      @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@

      Proposed Recommendation

      PR Duration
      -

      The minimum duration for the PR review period is four +

      The minimum duration for the PR review period is four weeks, followed by two weeks for a W3C's decision. If the review period spans the July/August or December holiday periods, more time is typically added.

      @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@

      Proposed Recommendation

      Recommendation

      -

      Congratulations. Now start collecting errata +

      Congratulations. Now start collecting errata for the Recommendation, and working on v.next.

      Dealing with the calendar

      The calendar and publication moratorium may get in the way of predicting precise milestones. Use our milestones calculator to help with dates.

      diff --git a/process/suspension.html b/process/suspension.html index c8b91f94..8b36048d 100644 --- a/process/suspension.html +++ b/process/suspension.html @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@

      Guidelines to suspend or remove participants from groups

      Nearby

      • - W3C Process Document + W3C Process Document
      • W3C Code of Conduct @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@

        Nearby

        -

        The W3C process document empowers the Director to suspend or remove participants from groups. This document provides details about implementation and delegation.

        +

        The W3C process document empowers the Director to suspend or remove participants from groups. This document provides details about implementation and delegation.

        The W3C Code of Conduct takes priority in case of any inconsistencies with this document.

        Warnings are given by W3C group chairs and/or team contacts.

        1. Consistent with the practices below, the Director delegates authority to suspend or remove participants:

        @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@

        Nearby

        • If the group chair and team contact are not in agreement, each should explain their reasons.
        • If the participant is a W3C Member representative, the CEO will coordinate the response with the Member's Advisory Committee representative.
          • -
        • If anyone raises an issue to the CEO that a participant fails to meet the requirements of Individual Participation Criteria, then the CEO is empowered to investigate. If the participant indeed is failing to meet those requirements, then after at least one warning and at least one subsequent violation, the CEO may temporarily or permanently suspend participation.
          • +
        • If anyone raises an issue to the CEO that a participant fails to meet the requirements of Individual Participation Criteria, then the CEO is empowered to investigate. If the participant indeed is failing to meet those requirements, then after at least one warning and at least one subsequent violation, the CEO may temporarily or permanently suspend participation.

        4. In extreme cases (such as death threats, or physical threats in general), the CEO and COO, acting together, may suspend or remove someone from participation in all groups. The CEO and COO must announce the action to W3C Management along with the rationale.

        diff --git a/process/tilt/normative-references.html b/process/tilt/normative-references.html index ecb698ca..a9734862 100644 --- a/process/tilt/normative-references.html +++ b/process/tilt/normative-references.html @@ -204,14 +204,14 @@

        Licensing

        W3C seeks to issue Recommendations that can be implemented on - a Royalty-Free + a Royalty-Free basis.

        What are the licensing terms of the referenced documents?

        -
        1. Are the technologies in the referenced parts available under terms that are compatible with the W3C Royalty-Free licensing requirements? +
          1. Are the technologies in the referenced parts available under terms that are compatible with the W3C Royalty-Free licensing requirements?
          2. What are the risks that the referenced part(s) may be encumbered by patent(s)?
          3. What are the policies identifying the rights and obligations of implementors of the referenced document that apply to implementors of the W3C specification?
          4. Does the reference conform to the normative referencing policy of the organization who published the referenced document? diff --git a/teamcontact/liaison-role.html b/teamcontact/liaison-role.html index defaad25..8d5c9867 100644 --- a/teamcontact/liaison-role.html +++ b/teamcontact/liaison-role.html @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@