W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: WG comments, Working Drafts, and Last Call -- clarification please?

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:11:02 -0400
Message-ID: <4A7B2AC6.3050707@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 12:27 -0500, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>>> Is it true that the Working Group can't comment during Last Call? That
>>> we have to raise issues before then?
>>
>> Last call is a decision that the WG is done with all the issues
>> it knows about. So it's out of order for a WG member to
>> be party to a decision that we've addressed all our issues
>> and then turn around and send last call comments.
> 
> Here's my understanding:
> 
> - By Last Call, a Working Group is expected to have resolved all serious 
> issues within the Working Group. In practice this doesn't always happen.

Perhaps not... in other groups.  It is not my intent to let that happen 
in this group.

> - There is no general rule against a Working Group member commenting on 
> the spec during Last Call.
> - It would be out of order for a Working Group member to attempt to 
> reopen an issue that has been resolved by actual Working Group decision, 
> if they don't have new information to provide. Not because it's Last 
> Call, but because WG decisions can only be reopened based on new 
> information.
> - Last Call is an appropriate time to register Formal Objections, even 
> from WG members. Technically, Formal Objections don't even really mean 
> anything before LC.

You can have formal objections to any decision.  As an example, 
hopefully soon there will be a decision to publish a Working Draft.  But 
lets not lose site of Dan's point: a Formal Objection by a Working Group 
member on that decision would be out of order unless it was based on 
something like new information.

> - It is common and accepted for WG members to comment on a spec in the 
> course of LC, either because they discover new issues, or because they 
> bring up something that may have been discussed, but not resolved by 
> Working Group decision.

Discovering new issues => Formal Objection:
   accepted, but hopefully not common

Items discussed, Issue raised, not resolved => Formal Objection
   accepted, and expected

Items discussed, not raised as Issue => Formal Objection
   out of order

> - The Working Group is obliged to formally address all Last Call 
> comments, whether from a WG member or not.
> 
>>> If this is true, is Last Call still on schedule for October? Do we
>>> know when in October?
>>
>> We can only go to last call in October if we close issues
>> a lot faster than we have been.
> 
> That I agree with. Our current rate on closing serious issues(*) is 
> approximately zero per year. If you extrapolate this trend, it does not 
> project to Last Call happening any time soon. By our charter and the 
> process, it is the responsibility of the Chairs to ensure that issues do 
> not remain open indefinitely.

Acknowledged.

> Regards,
> Maciej
> 
> * - By serious I mean people see resolving it as a showstopper, and 
> consensus is not found solely through discussion and action of the editor.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 19:11:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:43 GMT