- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:18:39 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > During the CSS WG we discussed a convention where someone would review a > test and if the test was found fine she/he would add <link rel=reviewer> > meaning that the test was approved. If the test was not found fine > changes would be made and the original author would verify the changes. > However, what flag is used in that case? > > Would it make sense for the person making changes to add a <link > rel=contributor> and for the original author to add the reviewer keyword > to his/her <link rel=author> element? Roughly you would either end up with: > > <link rel=author href=...> > <link rel=reviewer href=...> > > or > > <link rel="author reviewer" href=...> > <link rel=contributor href=...> > > And the combination of the entities identified by author, contributor, > and reviewer would be responsible for the correctness of the test. > > (Until this is agreed upon/clarified I will not review any tests.) I've updated the review process and format documentation http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/review http://wiki.csswg.org/test/css2.1/format#reviewer with the format requested by the WG http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0334.html ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2009 18:19:24 UTC