Yes, that is the correct process for an informational document.
> On Mar 14, 2017, at 12:23 PM, wamwagner at comcast.net wrote:
>> The Mapping CIP4 JDF to PWG PJT (JDFMAP) specification has been in Prototype state waiting for notice of prototype since June 2015. With the hibernation of the SM workgroup, it is desirable that this substantive work not be lost. It was agreed at the February face-to-face that this specification should be put up as a Best Practices informational PWG document.
>> Looking at Process 3.0, it states that Best Practice publications are” formal Working Group documents that undergo naming, Last Call and Formal Approval just like a Working Draft”. While the meaning of this may not be as clear as one might like, I take this to mean that the document:
> • Be identified as a Best Practices candidate
> • Be put at a Stable level (after some review and update---I expect that some of the reference, at least, must be revised)
> • Be presented to the PWG membership for Last Call
> • Last Call comment be addressed and resolved
> • The document be put to PWG vote
>> If there is agreement on this, I would ask Ira and Rick ti take a quick look to see what may need updating. The current version is at http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/sm3/wd/wd-smjdfmap10-20150604.pdf. We then may call a brief SM conference, perhaps for 23 March, to get working group approval and to initiate Last Call.
> Bill Wagner
>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> sm3 mailing list
>sm3 at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/sm3
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer