Opened 9 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#323 closed editorial (incorporated)

intended maturity level vs normative references

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by:
Priority: normal Milestone: 18
Component: non-specific Severity: Active WG Document
Keywords: Cc:

Description

The working assumption for a long time was that we recycle at Draft standard. That standards level is gone, and for going to Full Standard, we probably changed too much.

This leaves us with the option to go "back" to Proposed (*), in which case we can remove the prose in the Normative References about downrefs to other specs at Proposed level (namely, RFCs 1950..2).

(*) In which case we should plan to go to full standard as soon as possible afterwards.

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…

  • Type changed from design to editorial

At this point, it looks like we need to go Proposed; flipping to editorial.

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [1477]:

Target maturity level is 'proposed', no need to discuss RFC1950-2 as downrefs (see #323)

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Milestone changed from unassigned to 18
  • Resolution set to incorporated
  • Status changed from new to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.