W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Cookbook Issues page

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 13:41:34 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20070102130613.0bfde358@127.0.0.1>
To: "Jon Phipps" <jphipps@madcreek.com>
Cc: "SWD Working Group" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

At 02:34 PM 1/1/2007 -0500, Jon Phipps wrote:
>All,
>
>I've updated the Cookbook Issues page and am proposing that we use the format of this page as a model issues page per... 
>"ACTION: Jon to create an issues page on the wiki [recorded in <http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-swd-minutes.html#action07>http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-swd-minutes.html#action07]"
>
>...feedback and comments are very welcome.

Nice work on [1], Jon.  I can see that maintaining this in wiki syntax
could be easier than maintaining HTML.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/BestPracticeRecipesIssues

It would be convenient if each issue in the Overview section linked
to the corresponding portion of the Detailed section.

The Raised By for the @@TODOs in the 14 March WD might
as well be "WD editors" or something similar.

Regarding 7. Issue Process:

   [[
   Issues have the following life cycle:

   * Issues are submitted by members of the working group.
     Such issues are marked raised. The process for submission
     is described above.

   * The chair may open an issue, normally assigning an owner.
   ]]

I suggest the following:

* Issues are submitted by any member of the community by
   posting mail to the Working Group as described above.
   Such issues are marked as "raised".

* The WG chair(s) or their designees will identify raised issues
   as "open" (accepted) or "rejected" and normally assigns an
  owner to each open issue.  The issue raiser is notified as
   soon as practical if an issue is rejected giving a reason.

The reason for the 'raised' step is to allow the bookeeping
action of recording the arrival of the mail in the issues list
without having to also determine any next step.

  [[
   * The issue list is reviewed periodically. Normally, discussion is
     only in order for open issues. At times the chair may deem that a
     review is in order to attempt to resolve, merge, close, postpone
     and otherwise clean up the list.

   * Issues are closed by decision of the WG. The chair determines
     when the WG is ready to decide, usually in response to a proposal
     from the issue owner. The resolution is recorded in the issues
     list.
   ]]

Add: "The chair assigns an action to notify the person who raised
the issue of the resolution.  The raiser is invited to respond to the
resolution."

-Ralph
Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2007 18:42:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:27 GMT