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

Re: Formal Objection Tracker is missing a FO

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 06:30:46 -0400
Message-ID: <4CAAFE56.30603@intertwingly.net>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: public-html-comments@w3.org
On 10/05/2010 04:51 AM, Bijan Parsia 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.
> Sorry, I had a bit of trouble parsing that (or at least understanding
> the significance).
> My interpretation is that WG discussion of LC comments will happen in
> the normal WG fora (such as the WG mailing list).
> This is bog standard.

"Bog standard"?  People in the UK sure do talk funny.  :-)

This mailing list is intended to be where the comments are made and 
where the resposes are sent.

The point that I was trying to make is that discussion of Last Call 
comments will often occur on the public-html mailing list.  And, as you 
point out, surveys also tend to be open only to WG participants.

> The WG *response* to LC comments will, presumably, at least be cced
> to the forum wherein they were made, such as this list? If there is
> further discussion with the raiser, I presume that will happen here
> as well?
> (Again, this is pretty standard.)


> So, Shelley, if you want to be in on the internal WG debate (and do
> things like vote), making an LC comment leaves you no more involved
> with *those*. An LC comment *does* have to be vetted with you and if
> you refuse to be satisfied, brought forth to the director at
> transition time.
> A reasonable strategy is to raise the comment *now* as a bug. If the
> working group fails to dispose of it to your satisfaction, you can
> raise it as an LC comment. (i.e., "My comment is that I'm not
> satisfied with the WG resolution to my bug #237.") That may trigger
> another round of discussion, which may just be "We're not going to
> change this."

I would go further and state that raising the comment as a bug is the 
preferred strategy.

> My personal experience is early bugs are preferred and I would
> imagine be treated without prejudice. The tactics of commenting vary
> with the situation.
> Cheers, Bijan.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2010 10:31:22 UTC

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