W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-pro@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Missed phone conference

From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:10:58 +0100
Message-ID: <47FCDC82.3090406@icra.org>
To: public-bpwg-pro@w3.org

Well, we can use the issue tracker, or just send mail to this list with 
a proposal. For example, I'd like to make the following

PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That passing mobileOK Pro should not include the 
'testing' best Practice since it is inherently non-repeatable. However, 
authors claiming mobileOK Pro will be encouraged (and enabled) to list 
the devices on which they have tested their content using the relevant 
identifier from the DDWG's work.

Comments? If not, a set of +1 or -1 e-mails should settle this.

Phil.

Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'd be for that.
> 
> Question, also in view of your reworked tests and the feedback given:
> How do we capture worthwhile suggestions and how do we decide to
> implement them?
> 
> Kai 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-bpwg-pro-request@w3.org 
>> [mailto:public-bpwg-pro-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phil Archer
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 11:23 AM
>> To: public-bpwg-pro@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Missed phone conference
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich wrote:
>> [..]
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Shall we cancel the call until there is a clear need and 
>> schedule at 
>>> this time upon demand?
>>>  
>>> I would prefer that.
>> We can do that as long as:
>>
>> 1. The list continues to be active and we can show progress 
>> with the document (which we can this week, for example) 2. 
>> We're not giving more ammunition to those who think we're all 
>> wasting our time anyway.
>>
>> Having action items (with deadlines) helps concentrate the mind.
>>
>> How about this as a next batch of action items for us all:
>>
>> 1. Someone does Dan's tests (4.27 - 4.31). With the greatest 
>> of respect and personal liking for Mr Appelquist, I know he 
>> won't mind me saying that he's crap at doing his action items.
>>
>> 2. We each now review a batch of tests that someone else did 
>> (including any e-mail comments they may have made ;-)) Where 
>> things need actual resolutions - such resolutions can be 
>> posted to the list.
>>
>> 3. Let's see if we can work towards having a version of the 
>> doc sans-issues and editorial notes within a given time frame.
>>
>> P
>>
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 15:32:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 April 2008 15:32:39 GMT