W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Formal Objection Tracker is missing a FO

From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:07:37 -0500
Message-ID: <4CA9EDB9.4090900@burningbird.net>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "public-html-comments@w3.org" <public-html-comments@w3.org>

There is considerable confusion about how to handle Last Call comments 
with HTML5. Since the current draft of HTML5 is not a Last Call draft, 
is it appropriate to label any concerns in the bugzilla database as Last 
Call comments? I thought the W3C procedures specifically state that 
there is a formal call for comments for Last Call drafts?

Then there's the issue of resolving all of these Last Call comments in a 
Bugzilla database. Not everyone commenting on HTML5 is going to be a 
developer, comfortable with working in a Bugzilla database. In addition, 
some changes and concerns are too complex to be effectively discussed in 
a Bugzilla database, which was never intended for such purposes.

More importantly, those outside of the HTML WG are effectively cut off 
from parts of the process by the fact that the HTML WG will not accept 
change proposals from outside the group (in defiance of its own Design 
Process procedure). Change proposals are part of the Decision Process in 
the HTML WG, but aren't necessarily part of the W3C Last Call process. 
So, which takes precedence? The W3C procedures? Or the HTML WG co-chair 

The current procedure is marked as a Timeline to Last Call[1]. It states 
any bug in the Bugzilla database after the October first deadline will 
be treated as LC comment. However, there is nothing in this Timeline to 
state that this is the _only_ way that a Last Call comment can be made.

The W3C needs to ensure that the HTML WG actions are consistent with W3C 
procedures. More importantly, it needs to ensure that the HTML WG 
actions are consistent, period.


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html

On 10/4/10 9:50 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 10/04/2010 09:51 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>> By submitting Last Call comments here in this email list, as part of the
>> broader W3C Last Call process, I can participate, fully, throughout the
>> entire process.
> We will NOT use the public-html-comments@w3.org email as the target 
> for discussions related to any comments entered here.
>> The question on all of this that I've had, and continue to have, is how
>> can I ensure that a comment here is treated as a Last Call comment. I am
>> still waiting on clarification in this regard.
> I've entered the following bug report:
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10974
>> Shelley
> - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 4 October 2010 15:08:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:27 UTC