Pas transposition process

process/living-cr-rec.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Some Working Groups choose to publish the latest state of their work as a Candid
 
 Recommendations are endorsed by W3C as standards for the Web. Candidate Recommendation Snapshots are not endorsed by W3C as standards.
 
-Endorsement by W3C as a standard may be a requirement for others to adopt or otherwise refer to a specification. Regulations, industries such as those that produce consumer electronic products, etc., may require organization-level endorsement, guarantees provided by the standards development process, and commitments to the stability of a technical specification. For example, a W3C specification needs to be a Recommendation to be referred to by an ISO standard, or to become an ISO/IEC standard itself through the [PAS Submission mechanism](https://www.w3.org/2010/04/pasfaq).
+Endorsement by W3C as a standard may be a requirement for others to adopt or otherwise refer to a specification. Regulations, industries such as those that produce consumer electronic products, etc., may require organization-level endorsement, guarantees provided by the standards development process, and commitments to the stability of a technical specification. For example, a W3C specification needs to be a Recommendation to be referred to by an ISO standard, or to become an ISO/IEC standard itself through the [PAS transposition process](./pas-transposition-process.md).
 
 On the other hand, some groups may find that the Candidate Recommendation stage aligns more naturally with implementation work that informs the specification development, and with the prioritization mechanisms in multiple codebases. Keep in mind that organizations will still want to refer to these specifications.
 

process/pas-transposition-process.md

@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+---
+title: PAS transposition process
+toc: yes
+---
+
+## PAS transposition process
+
+The "Publicly Available Specification" (PAS) transposition process allows for standards developed outside ISO/JTC1 to become ISO standards. Organizations accredited as valid [PAS Submitters](https://www.iso.org/committee/45020.html?t=&view=documents#section-isodocuments-top) can send their specifications directly for country voting.
+
+W3C was approved as a JTC 1 [Recognized PAS Submitter](https://www.w3.org/2010/03/w3c-pas-submission.html) in October 2010, after a 3-month ballot completed by national members of ISO/IEC JTC 1.
+
+## Scope and spec selection
+
+The scope of our application is "**Core Web Technologies**", defined in our proposal as "any stable core Web technologies produced by W3C that are also in scope of ISO/IEC JTC 1". That establishes the baseline of what we may submit. Tutorials, tests, primers, and other Recommendations of similar types would be out of scope.
+
+A [Selection Process](https://www.w3.org/2010/07/potential-pas.html) for handling PAS was developed and reviewed within W3C. W3C's goal is to submit specifications that help avoid market fragmentation, improve deployment, and facilitate government procurement, and at the same time are stable and widely accepted.
+
+## Benefits for the W3C community
+
+* **Enhanced reputation** — As an internationally recognized standards organization, having W3C specifications become part of the ISO catalog may help them be more recognized.
+
+* **Increased adoption** — Incorporating W3C specifications into ISO standards is the only method for some regions to refer to W3C specifications in their policies and regulations.
+
+* **Improved coordination** — Sometimes it's difficult to include all relevant stakeholders in W3C review processes.  The PAS gives the W3C the opportunity to get reviews from other experts in ISO/JTC1 sub committees.
+
+* **Robustness and interoperability** — Having W3C specifications go through thorough review by international bodies and other experts contributes to more global interoperability.
+
+## Submitted specifications
+
+* [PAS on Web Services](https://www.w3.org/2010/08/ws-pas.html) (SOAP 1.2, MTOM, WS Addr and WS Policy) — Sent 21 Jan 2011, approved 25 July 2011.
+
+* [Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/) — [announced as approved](https://www.w3.org/news/2012/web-content-accessibility-guidelines-wcag-20-approved-as-isoiec-international-standard/) 15 October 2012.
+
+* [MathML 3.0](https://www.w3.org/TR/MathML3/) — [approved early 2015](https://www.w3.org/news/2015/mathml-3-0-becomes-isoiec-international-standard/).
+
+* [EPUB](https://www.w3.org/TR/epub/) — [updated in 2025](https://www.iso.org/standard/53255.html).
+
+* [WCAG 2.2](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/) — [updated in 2025](https://www.iso.org/standard/91029.html).
+
+## W3C Royalty-Free patent policy and ISO/IEC patent policy
+
+W3C Recommendations benefit from Royalty-Free (RF) licensing commitments, while JTC 1 has a Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (RAND) patent policy. Since RF is a special case of RAND, where the only applicable reasonable fee is zero, we do not foresee any conflict here. W3C specifications will continue to be subject to the [W3C Patent Policy](https://www.w3.org/policies/patent-policy/).
+
+Beyond patents, W3C's [PAS submitter application](https://www.w3.org/2010/03/w3c-pas-submission.html) also addresses how we expect to manage copyright, maintenance, dissemination, testing, translations, co-branding, and so on.
+
+## Preparation to submit a W3C spec to ISO
+
+* **Determine committee** — Specifications can be submitted directly to ISO/JTC1 or to any of their sub-committees, mainly depending on scope.
+
+* **Spec maintainer** — W3C would likely want to retain maintainer rights for all the specifications we submit, which we would need to make clear in the explanatory report.
+
+* **Ensure wide review** — If the ISO/JTC1 national balloting produces comments that lead to changes in W3C specifications (even if they are editorial), the whole process may need to be restarted. This is why it is crucial to ensure appropriately wide review and support for W3C specifications to become ISO standards before submission.
+
+## PAS transposition process steps
+
+The complete guide for this process is in the [ISO/JTC1 Standing Document (PDF)](https://jtc1info.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/SD-9-Guide-to-the-Transposition-of-PAS-2021.pdf).
+
+The following is a quick overview of what happens and who is in charge, as well as known rough time estimates. This is based on our experience in submitting [Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2](https://www.w3.org/WAI/news/2025-10-21/wcag22-iso/).
+
+* W3C agrees to submit a specification to ISO.
+
+* W3C lets our PAS Mentor (currently Norbert Bensalem) know about our intent to submit the specification. He may ask us to provide rationale for the following:
+
+  * [Pointers to W3C Overview pages/explainers](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/team-liaisons/2024Oct/0020.html) from other ISO/JTC1 materials.
+
+  * [Alignment of W3C Editorial guidelines with ISO Directives (part 2) expressed in SD9](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/team-liaisons/2025Jun/0003.html)
+
+* W3C prepares the submission package according to the instructions of SD9 and other considerations discussed with the PAS Mentor. The submission package includes:
+
+  * An A4 Microsoft Word copy of our HTML-based document, with:
+
+    * Consistent formatting,
+
+    * Internal links pointing to the Word document itself instead of the online W3C specification (including ToC, definitions, URI fragments, etc.).
+
+  * An explanatory report.
+
+  * An A4 PDF copy of the specification that was previously converted to Microsoft Word.
+
+  * If the specification contains any graphics, each of them should be provided as a separate asset.
+
+  For more details about a submission package, W3C Staff can review [`2025/12/ISO-submission-package-wcag-22-20241212/`](https://cvsweb.w3.org/Team/WWW/2025/12/ISO-submission-package-wcag-22-20241212/).
+
+* W3C sends the submission package to the JTC1 Secretariat (Lisa Rajchel) as expressed by our PAS Mentor.
+
+* ISO/JTC1 initiates the translation phase for all national bodies to make the proposed specification available in their language (8-week period).
+
+* ISO/JTC1 initiates the DIS ballot (12-week period).
+
+* ISO/JTC1 distributes the balloting comments to W3C.
+
+* W3C addresses these comments, ideally with no changes to the specification, and sends them back to ISO/JTC1 Secretariat (Lisa Rajchel).
+
+* W3C and ISO/JTC1 coordinate on publication and announcements, including:
+
+  * Proposed wording from W3C to strengthen alignment between the newly adopted ISO standard and W3C mission, principles and values.
+
+  * Availability of the specification -- Free from W3C TR space and likely free from ISO catalog as per [ISO/IEC 40500:2025](https://www.iso.org/standard/91029.html).
+
+* ISO/JTC1 initiates systematic review, five years after the publication of the standard.
+
+## What can be done to make the ISO/W3C collaboration even more productive ?
+
+There may be ways to make it even easier for a W3C Specification to move to the PAS process. For instance, both W3C and ISO have specific timelines for review as part of their respective processes, often performed by overlapping sets of experts, e.g., W3C members who are also active in their national ISO organization. We may wish to synchronize those reviews (which take place at different times, under current processes). This sort of optimization might require some changes to the W3C process, but more experience and discussion would be required before any changes are proposed.
+
+On a practical side, W3C already engages in a number of [liaisons](../../liaisons/) between ISO committees and W3C Working Groups.
+
+It would be desirable automate the conversion process from our HTML format to the PDF ISO wants, to ease the editorial work around manual conversion. We are in conversation about adding more automation to the ISO part, but we've reached no conclusion as to what this would look like nor when this would be available.