You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Some CR gets published without the Director's approval and, in theory, only contain editorial changes.
Some CRs gets published with the Director's approval and do contain substantive changes, thus becoming a reference draft for the Patent Policy.
It would be nice to differentiate them in the API so that, for a given CR version, it's possible to determine what was the latest reference draft used for it (could be FPWD or a previous CR).
For a CR that has a WD as a previous version, it is automatically substantive and used in IPP.
Something "substantive": "true",
or "reference-draft": "true" would do it.
Use cases:
the Director diff tool needs to use the latest reference draft when looking at a new CR/PR publication (unless the previous version was a WD)
the email announcer of public-review-announce should not send email on a new CR if it doesn't have substantive changes (unless the previous version was a WD)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Some CR gets published without the Director's approval and, in theory, only contain editorial changes.
Some CRs gets published with the Director's approval and do contain substantive changes, thus becoming a reference draft for the Patent Policy.
It would be nice to differentiate them in the API so that, for a given CR version, it's possible to determine what was the latest reference draft used for it (could be FPWD or a previous CR).
For a CR that has a WD as a previous version, it is automatically substantive and used in IPP.
Something "substantive": "true",
or "reference-draft": "true" would do it.
Use cases:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: