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

Re: UI Mockup [Was: CfC: create a public list to announce new publications; deadline Oct 15]

From: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 08:11:22 -0800
Message-ID: <545B9DAA.3090109@linux.intel.com>
To: chaals@yandex-team.ru, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
CC: public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>, Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>

On 2014-11-06 03:31, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
>
> 04.11.2014, 23:08, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>:
>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 6:09 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>   In the spirit of facilitating and increasing the likelihood of early and wide document reviews, a number of people in thread [1] voiced support for creating a Public list the Publications team would use to announce publications of FPWDs, LCWDs, 2014-preCRs and CRs. This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to create such a list and for the Publications team to use it when these types of documents are published.
>>>
>>>   If anyone has any comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by Oct 15.
>>>
>>>   Assuming this CfC `passes`, a secondary issue is the name of the list. I am indifferent and offer these possibilities: public-{pubs,publications}; other suggestions are welcome and encouraged.
>> Hi Art,
>>
>> Here's a rudimentary UI to make it easier for chairs and team contacts to send these review notices:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2014/11/getreview/
>>
>> Would something like this be useful?
> Very, but it *really* needs to cover normal Working Drafts.

And Editor's drafts too.  It could be a WG wants review of a new feature 
in the Editor's draft that they're deciding whether to develop or not.  
For instance, a WG could have sections marked experimental, that they 
don't put into their TRs.  They could want feedback on one of those in 
particular and so point to the section of the Editor's draft.

Also, reviews of proposed charters and other non-spec reviews like 
requests for feedback on what new features a WG should consider would 
need a different form that links to a document that isn't a spec, but is 
the thing to be reviewed.



>
>> Much can be done to improve the tool; I've included a few notes in the page to start. This is meant to foster discussion and
>> then serve as input to the Systems Team to create something well-tuned to Chairs and Team-contacts.
>>
>> +1 to the proposed name public-review-announcement@w3.org.
> seems fine to me.
>
>> Here's an example of the generated email:
>>
>> -----
>> Subject: HTML6 - review requested
>> To: public-review-announcement@w3.org
>> Reply-to: public-html@w3.org
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The HTML Working Group requests review of the following specification before 2014-01-01:
>>
>>     HTML6
>>     http://www.w3.org/TR/html6
>>
>> This publication is a First Public Working Draft [1]. Therefore,
>> while the specification is likely to change significantly, it is
>> helpful to let the group know whether you think this is a good
>> general direction.
>>
>> Please send comments and questions to public-html@w3.org
>>
>> The group has specifically asked for feedback on the following:
>>
>> ============================================
>> Please review section 7.
>> ============================================
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#first-wd
>> ------------
>>
>> Ian
>>>   [1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Oct/0000.html>
>> --
>> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2014 16:13:00 UTC

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