W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > November 2014

Re: w3process-ISSUE-147 (cepc-facilitate-collaborative-evolution): Put the CEPC document in a system that facilitates change requests and evolution of the document [Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]

From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 05:51:25 +0100
To: Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-Id: <256511415163085@webcorp02g.yandex-team.ru>
- sysbot+tracker@

05.11.2014, 01:24, "Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>:
> w3process-ISSUE-147 (cepc-facilitate-collaborative-evolution): Put the CEPC document in a system that facilitates change requests and evolution of the document [Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct]
>
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/147
>
> Raised by: Arthur Barstow
> On product: Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
>
> David Singer proposed a change request to the CEPC in <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2014OctDec/0183.html> and Jeff Jaffe encouraged him in <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2014OctDec/0185.html> to submit a change request. That's difficult when the document is not available in a system (such as Github) that facilitates change requests.

Quoting the very short document: "Send comments or questions on this document to public-pwe@w3.org [publicly archived]."

That seems to be a reasonable mechanism for requesting changes.

While github is a nice system for code (and even just text) whose nature is to change a lot, it would be a problem if the code changed rapidly and readily.

People need to know and understand what is in there. Stability is important to that, unless the entire W3C community is regularly monitoring the document. Imagining that they do would be naive to the point of foolish.

Publishing it at a w3.org URL, being rational but conservative about changes, and accepting requests for change via email to a publicly archived list seems a perfectly reasonable process.

I fail to see how requiring people to learn git in order to fork the document, edit it themselves, and submit a pull request serves more than a subset of our community who already have those skills.

I suggest that this issue be dropped as "make-work".

cheers
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2014 04:51:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:12 UTC