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

Re: CfC: Publish HTML5, RDFa heartbeats and Microdata, 2D Context and H:TML as FPWDs

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 08:38:23 -0800
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <201470E8-67EC-4770-9AD9-4C741411BD05@apple.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Feb 14, 2010, at 6:10 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> ...
>>> But anyway, the Team will do what they do. If you want there to be  
>>> issue markers in the input we give to the Team before they do  
>>> their final edits, I suggest you report the issues to the Working  
>>> Group first.
>>> ...
>> I did do that. Over here.
>> What now? Should I open a Bugzilla issue?
>
> Yes.
>
>> What component? It affects both RDFa and Microdata, after all.
>
> New components will be create by the time documents are published as  
> separate drafts, if not before.
>
> Feel free to create a bug on each.
>
> At the current time, HTMl5 spec bugs is a suitable component for  
> bugs against Microdata.

In addition to what Sam said, I would suggest that, for maximum  
effectiveness, any bugs filed should contain the information  
recommended here:

http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#bugzilla-bug

	* A clear statement of a problem with the spec—bug reports are more  
useful if they identify concrete problems.
	* Only one issue—please use separate bugs for separate issues.
	* An indication of what section or sections of the spec are affected.
	* At least one suggested way to solve the problem. Optionally, this  
can include sample spec text. Listing multiple alternatives is ok, and  
even a vague suggestion is fine at this stage.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Sunday, 14 February 2010 16:38:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:14 UTC