What is the Process
The W3C Process Document describes the organizational structure of the W3C and processes,
responsibilities and functions that enable W3C to accomplish its mission.
- Revised in the Process Community Group
- Open to anyone, includes the AB
- Final decision by AC Review, CG has no authority
Selected Topics from the Process 2021 Cycle
What is a Registry
A registry documents a data set
consisting of one or more associated registry tables,
each table representing an updatable collection of logically independent,
consistently-structured registry entries.
What is it for?
- collision avoidance
- duplication avoidance
- ease of submission
- centralization of information / ease of discovery
- consensus
The Problem
W3C has no standard way to maintain registries
People have been using various ad-hoc and inconsistent work-arounds
Registry in a wiki
(This particular example is a deprecated registry)
Registry in a (set of) custom-built pages
Registry in a (perpetual?) CR
Registry in a (perpetual?) Working Draft
Registry in a Working Group Note
Registry Proposal
Makes registries ‘first class’ deliverables of the W3C, on /TR,
referenced by W3C URLs,
with a process for defining, publishing, and maintaining one in the Process document.
Anatomy
- One or more Registry Tables
- Registry Definitions, which define for each table:
- the purpose & scope
- the fields
(name, type, constraints…)
- what kind of changes to are allowed
(addition, deletion, modification, deprecation…)
- the process & criteria to register or modify entries
- the custodian (not necessarily the Working Group)
- Must not contain normative requirements on implementations
Registry Process
(base case)
-
Put the Definitions in a section of a REC track document
-
Put the Tables in the REC track document as well
-
Take the Definitions to REC normally
(consensus, wide review, WD→CR→PR→REC, AC Review…)
-
Tables can be updated with no more process than required by the Definitions
(no Director or AC Review, no Transition Call, can be fully automated if desired…)
-
In line with current practices
-
Stable rules approved by the AC
let us grant official standing
-
Full flexibility for updates / additions within those rules
Automation
Allows automated submission/publication if desired
Could be Pull-Request based, or anything convenient
Publication
Can be in the same REC as the referencing specification…
…or in a standalone REC containing only the Registry Definitions and Tables.
Tables can be inline in the REC as HTML content…
…or in an attached machine-readable file…
…or both.
Open Questions
-
For registry-only documents: usual REC Track or simplified Registry Track?
Do we need both CR and PR?
-
Should we allow Definitions and Tables to be published separately?
(i.e. not just separate files, but completely separate /TR publications)
Must be Together?
- Pros:
- Easy to keep everything in sync
- All information is available without duplication nor external reference
- One thing to reference
- Data-only attachment possible anyway
- Cons:
- Rules for updating Definitions and Tables are different
- Most readers of the Tables have no interest in maintenance rules
May be Separate?
- Pros:
- IETF+IANA do it, why not us?
- Tables document can be shorter
- Can set up a different back-end (proxy?) for Tables, to ease automation, with no risk to Definitions
- Only allows separation, does not mandate it
- Cons:
- Partial duplication of Definitions needed for readability
- Mutual cross-links needed between Tables and Definitions
- Need to manage potential incompatibilities between updates
Separate track?
(For standalone registries only)
Use REC Track as-is
- Pros:
- Well known
- Cons:
- Unnecessarily invokes Patent Policy
- Requires separate CR and PR
Define simplified Registry Track
- Pros:
- Avoids invoking Patent Policy
- Can merge CR with PR
- Cons:
- One more thing to define/know
Do we need both CR and PR?
- Upsides of having both:
- CR signals “we think we’re done”, which some wait for before reviewing
- Only one AC Review, at PR
(though multiple CRs less likely)
- Upsides of merging:
- No phase dedicated to gathering implementation feedback due to no implementation to wait for
- No artificial delay due to minimum review periods stacking up
It’s your turn!
- Review the draft Process:
- Ask questions at the AC meeting
- Talk to your favorite AB member
- Participate in the Process CG