This official standards process does not preclude other ventures, like the
current icon-proposals; I think that's great, but won't be and official WebStep
stnadard, either.
Rohit
------------------------------
Step 0: Discussion
* comparison of current implementations
* user wishlists
Step 1: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
* must be a self-contained proposal, referring to OpenStep and W3O
standards as appropriate
* should be implementable in several different ways
* should be implemented and running in at least one application
* A model RFC might include the following sections:
Description
Rationale (i.e. how does it conform to OpenStep/W3O)
Specification
Testing Criteria (i.e. pass/fail interoperability)
Example Implementation
Step 2: Debate & Testing
* WebStep exists as a forum to debate these standards
* At least one other, separate conforming implementation must be
presented (a la IETF rfcs)
Step 3: Voting
* Simple majority (?) of {developers, cast votes, ??}
* One week delay (?)
* Approved documents become "WebStep PROVISIONAL STANDARDS"
Step 4: Sponsorship
* Who can validate our process? We already have nugi on board as
sponsor; is ANDI alive?
* Ideally, we can present a package of our standards to W3O
* Does NeXT play a role?
Step 5: Deployment
* Conformance testing seems a little stuffy.
* Conforming products should be able to call themselves
"WebStep-compliant"
* Sponsors should also be willing to let their names be invoked: "As
recognized by {nugi, W30, NeXT}"