Process should say how W3T can update NOTES

[tantek]

As raised in discussion by Ralph at W3CAB meeting in London.

[swickr]

Specifically, when a Group Note is no longer in scope for a chartered group and the Note has errata or may otherwise be in need of revision, the Team should be able to publish an updated Note. Review of changes in advance of such publication should be encouraged.

[dwsinger]

OK by me. Please suggest (asap) text!

[dwsinger]

the process CG is open to suggestions -- Ralph, do you have proposed text?

[dwsinger]

we need proposed text, or this risks being closed/no-action. @swickr

[dwsinger]

we can't say that the team can make Editorial changes because a Note is entirely Editorial (against the formal definition). see #536 and #28

still need a proposed change…

[frivoal]

we can't say that the team can make Editorial changes because a Note is entirely Editorial

We do now have a definition for editorial vs substantive changes to a note.

We also have (in https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/#publishing-notes):

If a Note produced by a chartered group is no longer in scope for any group, the Team may republish the Note with class 1 changes incorporated, as well as with errata and Team corrections annotated.

Is this enough, or do we need the Team to be able to make class 2 changes directly?

[css-meeting-bot]

The Revising W3C Process CG just discussed Team updating Notes.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<fantasai> Subtopic: Team updating Notes
<fantasai> github: https://github.com//issues/120#issuecomment-1403176829
<fantasai> florian: Since issue, we made some changes
<fantasai> ... Team can do Class 1 edits (markup fixes)
<fantasai> ... also can annotate proposed changes
<fantasai> ... can't fold in directly, but can say that once a WG is created expect to make these changes, or whatever
<fantasai> ... Issue seems to be addressed; if we want more could open a follow-up later
<fantasai> plh: Team can make Class 2 changes in REC that has no WG
<fantasai> ... [quotes Process]
<fantasai> ... but for a Note, how do we differentiate editorial vs substantive?
<fantasai> florian: Old definition of the classes of changes didn't help, but we updated that
<fantasai> plh: If we have a definition that works for NOTEs, then we should make REC and NOTE match
<fantasai> ... if can make editorial edits to REC, why not NOTE
<fantasai> ... though in practice, Team is unlikely to make any edits on its own to a REC
<fantasai> florian: [quotes spec]
<fantasai> -> https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20231103/#correction-classes
<fantasai> florian: So your proposal is to update ability of Team to match REC
<fantasai> plh: or downgrade to match
<fantasai> plh: so far haven't needed to, unless there's a group behind it
<fantasai> florian: If didn't have ability to mark proposed changes, wouldn't be enough
<fantasai> ... but given that, is it not enough?
<fantasai> plh: I can imagine it, but unlikely without a responsible group
<fantasai> ... don't think we should give wildcard to Team to make substantive change to notes
<fantasai> .. idk how to do in NOTEs
<fantasai> florian: we can do the same as REC amendments in NOTEs
<fantasai> plh: but we can leave substantive changes to another day, not much motivation atm
<fantasai> fantasai: if not closing issue, let's move on, lots of stuff on agenda

[frivoal]

@plh noted an inconsistency: if we close this issue as is, then the Team has a stronger ability to make changes to RECs without a WG than to Notes without a WG:

• For every type of Technical Report, including Notes, the Team can errata and Team corrections, which are a sub-category of class-2 changes (See https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20231103/#candidate-amendments)
• For RECs only, the Team can make any class 2 change https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20231103/#revised-rec-editorial

Also, class-1 changes by the Team are explicitly allowed for Notes, Draft Notes, and RECs, not not for pre-REC maturity stages of the REC track (at least not explicitly).

Proposal: Consolidate all this into one single section ("Technical Report maintenance in the absence of a Chartered Group"?), and allow the Team, for every type of TR document, at every maturity, if there's no group chartered to maintain the document, to make class-1 changes, as well as errata and Team corrections, but not other class 2 changes (nor class 3 or 4).

[frivoal]

Attempting a consolidation of maintenance by the Team into a single section with #860

[frivoal]

Closed by merging #860