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

Re: HTML Working Group Decision Policy - for discussion

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 08:17:03 -0400
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1255004223.4137.16.camel@chacal>
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 17:43 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> 
> >
> > [[
> > The group SHOULD set a time limit for acknowledgment by a reviewer of
> > the group's substantive response; a reviewer cannot block a group's
> > progress. It is common for a reviewer to require a week or more to
> > acknowledge and comment on a substantive response. The group's
> > responsibility to respond to reviewers does not end once a reasonable
> > amount of time has elapsed. However, reviewers SHOULD realize that  
> > their
> > comments will carry less weight if not sent to the group in a timely
> > manner.
> > ]]
> >
> > This is left undefined in the current draft. Step 2 doesn't have the
> > boilerplate statement that will advise the commenter. The expectation
> > here would be to have a timeout (2 weeks is acceptable in general).
> 
> I've also had feedback from several people outside the mailing list  
> that there should be a time limit after which we assume we're not  
> going to get a response. Does everyone agree that this is reasonable?  
> If so, I'll add a 2 week waiting period (or longer, if people want) to  
> the policy.

Sounds good to me. An other related external feedback that I've got
regarding time limits is the duration between the responses sent back to
commenters and the transition request out of LC. It might be good to
indicate that we'll leave two weeks in between as well (unless we get
positive responses from all those commenters).

Philippe
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 12:17:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC