Request for Note publishing capabilities [I18N-ACTION-444]

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Request for Note publishing capabilities [I18N-ACTION-444]

Phillips, Addison-2
Hello spec-prod,

In a recent teleconference [1], the I18N WG tasked me [2] with asking you for an additional capability in the publication tool.

While the Internationalization Working Group publishes some documents on the REC track, like a few other "horizontal" groups (accessibility, security, privacy, and the like), we also publish a reasonably large number of Working Group Notes.

One reason for a Working Group Note is to record some work for historical purposes, such as setting down the requirements that went into some REC or recording work done on a document that has been abandoned. Unlike those purposes, our WG publishes documents with best practices information, authoring guidelines, information about cultures or languages, and other materials. Publication under Note status makes the document available as a reference in other, more normative, documents and provides a stable URL in /TR/ space on the W3C site.

With recent changes to the toolset and processes used by the W3C (which our WG very much welcomes, by the way!), one problem we've noted--and the reason I'm writing to you--is that while the new publishing tool makes it easy and seamless to publish Working Drafts of REC-track documents, that Note-track documents are reputed to not be supported. In researching this request, I note that there was a recent thread [3] which suggests that this is more of a problem with ReSpec/boilerplate than it is with Echidna, at least until we wish to publish the document to final Note status.

Could you please:

1. Confirm that Note track documents (with a status of Working Draft but not FPWD) can be autopublished using the new tools?
2a. Assuming (1) is true, clarify the process and other documentation (such as the bullet point about "only normative documentation" at [4])?
2b. Assuming (1) is false, fix is so that we can?

Thanks (for I18N),

Addison

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2015AprJun/0267.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/444 
[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2015AprJun/0021.html
[4] https://github.com/w3c/echidna/wiki/How-to-use-Echidna 

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect (Amazon)
Chair (W3C I18N WG)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.