W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: edits to the draft should reflect the consensus of the WG

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:57:44 +0900
Message-Id: <8E0DD720-13E3-41C7-A929-DCDA84D8D37A@w3.org>
Cc: HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>

Hi,

I think there is a need for explanation.

Robert Burns (16 août 2007 - 15:29) :
>> What I object to is precisely that he's not adhering to those  
>> promises. He is not listening to feedback at all. He ignores  
>> feedback, fails to read feedback in good faith and merrily edits  
>> the draft without taking the feedback into account.
>>
>> There is nothing in the recent edits regarding @alt and @usemap  
>> that has listened to any of the feedback, Instead he spends his  
>> time compiling lists and scoring the WGs participants[1]. How does  
>> that fit with the process Ian promised to adhere to?

1. Editing a specification is a huge and difficult work. Shooting on  
the main editor without having backup plans for editing will not  
solve many things.

2. Ian Hickson is collecting issues in different email folders. I  
would rather prefer that his inbox be public,
	BUT I can't let say things which are wrong.
He's editing the specification when he hits one of his folder on a  
specific issue. Sometimes his folder will contain a lot of emails on  
one particular issue. Then when he has finished to read it and edit,  
he usually replies in one shot to all emails.

He's also taking into account the research and accumulated  
*collective* knowledge put on the wiki.

Our discussions on alt and usemap are not in the specification for a  
very simple reason. He doesn't have reached yet this specific folder.  
A few months ago he was dealing with two years old feedback.


What you could argue for is more visibility. For example today I  
proposed to Hixie on IRC, that on the table of content outline of the  
specification. Either on a separate page or on the html document. He  
puts flag to indicate the maturity level of the edits and/or the  
planned.

For example, there could on each toc item. (this is just an example)

3.2.3.3. Real numbers         Last edited: 2007-05-27. Need more work
3.2.3.6. Lists of integers    Not yet edited.
3.3.3.1. Block-level elements Last edited: 2006-03-16 Pretty Stable
3.3.3.6. Paragraphs           2007-08-16 - Working on it now.


Another possibility is to send a simple email to the list to inform  
which section is edited. If you want to track the work there is also  
as it is said in the editor's draft right now.

     *  Twitter messages (non-editorial changes only): http:// 
twitter.com/WHATWG
     * Interactive Web interface: http://html5.org/tools/web-apps- 
tracker
     * Commit-Watchers mailing list: http://lists.whatwg.org/ 
listinfo.cgi/commit-watchers-whatwg.org
     * Subversion interface: http://svn.whatwg.org/
     * CVS log: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/spec/Overview.html







-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2007 06:57:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:04 GMT