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

Re: ISSUE-93 (details): Return Details Element [HTML 5 spec]

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:54:57 -0800
Message-ID: <63df84f1001081154n64073b14s58d7a6748b7e3ecb@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTML Weekly WG <public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, HTML Weekly Issue Tracker wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ISSUE-93 (details): Return Details Element [HTML 5 spec]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/93
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This issue was opened in violation of the process and should be closed
>>>>>> without prejudice. The bug in question was reopened for reconsideration,
>>>>>> meaning the next step in the process is 5.c, not 5.d:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8379
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You have a point. No new information was added, which is justification
>>>>> for re-opening a bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, people have stated they were unaware of this bug. I did cc
>>>>> the HTML WG on the bug, but evidently, the email to the group was
>>>>> ignored, or missed.
>>>>
>>>> It appears to me that it was not distributed. Not sure why it is, but
>>>> cc'ing public-html does not seem to yield the expected results of
>>>> having the list receive bugmail.
>>>>
>>>> / Jonas
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Nov/0634.html
>>
>> Yes, but no other emails has been sent to the list. Despite the fact
>> that you cc'ed the public-html list on the bug.
>>
>> / Jonas
>>
>
> How many emails is enough, Jonas?
>
> Is there a magic number? Does it have to be equivalent to what
> happened with Microdata, and is currently happening with summary?
>
> Do we have to send emails to the group that state "No, people I REALLY
> mean it! I want to remove details! Talk to me!"
>
> I'm sorry, I know I'm coming across as facetious, and your concerns
> are valid. But we're damned if we do--for cluttering up the email
> list-- and damned if we don't.

I'm not really sure what you are talking about here to be honest. I've
been making a few claims in this thread:

1. It is impossible, without manually cc'ing yourself to every bug, to
get emails for all technical discussions taking place in bugzilla.

This turned out to not be true. It is in fact possible by subscribing
to the public-html-bugzilla email list. However no one had mentioned
this possibility previously on this list. And it is somewhat more
cumbersome than subscribing to other lists due to a lack of
'subscribe' links in the lists.w3.org page. So I still think my
bringing up this issue and researching it, has been of value to this
thread.

2. cc'ing the public-html list in bugzilla does not work.

Adding someone to the cc list in bugzilla usually results in that
email address being notified for most changes in the bug. Definitely
including when discussion takes place in the bug. However this does
not seem to be the case when cc'ing the public-html@w3.org email
address to the cc list of a bug. No emails are sent to the public-html
list even though public-html has been added to the cc list of the bug.

Yes, there are other instances when bugzilla sends emails to the
public-html list. Such as when the "NE" keyword is added to a bug.
This does not however change the fact that adding public-html to the
cc list in bugzilla does not yield the expected results of public-html
receiving emails for subsequent comments added to bug.

I hope this makes things clear.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 8 January 2010 19:55:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:12 UTC