Re: VTT Working Draft, second wide review

David,

see my responses in line.


>> Le 02/08/2017 à 01:15, David Singer a écrit :
>>>
>>> Hi Thierry
>>>
>>> I think the TT group has now had a month to complain or comment on the
>>> disposition, so I think we can/should take them as OK.  See
>>> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2017Jun/0109.html>
>>>
>>> We have a new WD, thank you.  I think we should formally re-request Wide
>>> Review with the hope of a CR transition soon.

I have edited a new WD for the wide review ending sept 22nd.
https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-webvtt1-20170808/

I will prepare the wide review request message and send you a draft.


The previous Wide Review is
>>> extensively documented <https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebVTT_Wide_Review> as you
>>> know.


This documents looks a bit like a disposition of comments for the first 
wide review in 2014. It is edited in a wiki (there is no formal document 
required for this by the W3C process).

All comments seems to have been processed.

- One is resolved but probably not incorporated "2.3- Done - CG resolution".

- Some are resolved and incorporated into the specs (marked as  "2.4- 
Done - CG resolution and spec update").


- Some are resolved but rejected : "2.7- Done but comment Rejected"


In all cases, did the commenters agreed to these CG resolutions?

If yes, could you provide links to  approuval message?

If no,  we must go through a regular process to contact commenters and 
get their approuval, and the TTWG could then change the status to the 
following.


3.1- CG resolution approuved by WG
  3.2- Approuved and Response drafted
  3.3- Response send to commenter
  3.4- Response agreed by commenter
  3.5- Response rejected by commenter  (need more discussion - back to 
step 2.5)
  3.6- Response partially agreed by commenter (need more discussion - 
back to step 2.5)

Thierry

Received on Thursday, 3 August 2017 17:20:15 UTC