W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-ct@w3.org > September 2008

Assigning the Last Call comments

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:50:32 +0200
Message-ID: <48C52DA8.5000209@w3.org>
To: public-bpwg-ct <public-bpwg-ct@w3.org>

As mentioned in the previous agenda, to try to speed things up a little 
bit, I assigned the Last Call comments received so far to the usual 
participants of the CT Task Force.

I tried to assign comments to people in a too dumb a way, but, well, 
we're mostly talking about rolling a dice here... We may adjust things 
afterwards. Let me know if you feel a comment assigned to you is out of 
your domain of expertise. Note that I'm not trying to dictate the way 
comments should be handled, I'm merely trying to find a way to handle them!

See below for the list of comments assigned to you. I divided the 
comments on a "per section" basis, so the number of comments varies from 
participant to participant. As editor of the spec, Jo gets more than his 
share. That's because some comments "only" seem to require some 
editorial magic.

I voluntarily did not assign the comments to the sections 4.1.5 
Alteration of HTTP Headers Values and 4.3.6.2 HTTPS Link re-writing. 
We'll see tomorrow if there's a volunteer and direction to follow to 
handle them.


Things to do with the comments assigned to you
----------------------------------------------
1/ read and summarize the comments (if needed for the summary).
2/ summarize the group's position and rationale so far (if possible).
3/ propose changes to the spec (if needed) and/or some decision that the 
Task Force should take to resolve the comment, and/or some leads to 
discuss on the mailing-list (public-bpwg-ct).
4/ draft a reply with rationale to each of the comments (should probably 
be done once we resolve the outcome, unless you're pretty sure we're 
going to follow your advice)

In all cases:
- the final responses will be reviewed by the task force before they are 
sent
- for consistency reasons, the editor (which means Jo) should be the one 
who crafts the final text for the spec and the replies.


List of comments per participant
--------------------------------
[Let me know if I forgot anyone!]

Andrew:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41506&

Bryan:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41539&

Francois:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41989&

Heiko:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41920&

Jo:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=2347&

Pontus:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=39412&

Sean:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41688&

Rob:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=41449&

Tom:
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/37584/WD-ct-guidelines-20080801/search/?responseFilter=incl&assigned=42856&


Francois.
Received on Monday, 8 September 2008 13:51:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 September 2008 13:51:06 GMT