From 4b00e3cba6bb2a0ec1db6151b07c1ce500dba61f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Domenic Denicola Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 10:04:41 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify and exemplify non-normative changes (#225) * Clarify and exemplify non-normative changes The previous text implied that non-normative changes were the same as editorial changes. At least using the definition of "editorial" in https://github.com/whatwg/meta/blob/main/COMMITTING.md#title-prefixes, this is not correct; non-normative changes are a superset of editorial changes. * Add a note about implementation divergences --- Working Mode.md | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Working Mode.md b/Working Mode.md index 8460c5b..5740872 100644 --- a/Working Mode.md +++ b/Working Mode.md @@ -49,7 +49,13 @@ Additions to the standard can also be proposed as issues. However, the process f ### Non-normative issues -Changes of editorial nature can be made, accepted, or rejected by the editor without discussion. +Changes of editorial nature, or which only impact non-normative text, can be made, accepted, or rejected by the editor without discussion. + +The same applies for changes which are (in the editor's judgement) obvious bug fixes, where the standard failed to reflect the clearly-intended behavior in its normative text. + +EXAMPLE: Some representative cases of such "obvious bug fixes" are [restoring an accidentally-deleted step](https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/9980), [correcting a value to match the declared IDL type signature](https://github.com/whatwg/urlpattern/pull/213), or [passing a value through the algorithms that expect it](https://github.com/whatwg/streams/pull/1300). + +NOTE: if implementations disagree on a behavior, then even if the correct fix feels obvious, it's better to start a wider discussion and take the fix through the normative change process. ## Changes