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

RE: 2014 Process: WD -> CR difficulties

From: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:36:02 +0000
To: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
CC: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Message-ID: <b4341a86d0404450b63c522bb97c5671@BLUPR03MB488.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
> But, if we don't make the public list, the necessary people definitely won't subscribe :)

Fair enough.  I agree the list is necessary, just pointing out that it's not sufficient.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Carr [mailto:wayne.carr@linux.intel.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 11:20 AM
To: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH); Arthur Barstow; public-w3process
Cc: Nigel Megitt
Subject: Re: 2014 Process: WD -> CR difficulties


On 2014-10-02 09:51, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> We can make the list public, but we can't make the necessary people subscribe to the list.

But, if we don't make the public list, the necessary people definitely won't subscribe :)

It seems a simple thing to do and if WG Chairs decided to use it, it could be a useful resource to know what was ready for review without wading through a ton of mail - if it caught on, it would be a useful way to solicit feedback. (that feedback would not be on the notification list - the notification list would indicate where the discussion was).

>
> The AB and/or the Process CG discussed this in some depth while deliberating the 2014 process.  My recollection of the consensus was that -- consistent with the spirit of the new process philosophy -- the Process Document doesn't describe a machine that you crank to put out Recommendations, it describes *what*criteria a spec must pass to become a Recommendation.  *How* that happens can be optimized by specific WGs and Chairs to work in the actual environment they live in.

It doesn't need to be in the Process document and it doesn't need to be required.  W3C Staff just has to decide if they'd post the public notices of transition requests and WG Chairs could decide if they want to use it when they're looking for feedback to announce what they were looking for feedback on and where to send comments.



>   
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wayne Carr [mailto:wayne.carr@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 9:43 AM
> To: Arthur Barstow; public-w3process
> Cc: Nigel Megitt
> Subject: Re: 2014 Process: WD -> CR difficulties
>
>
> On 2014-10-02 04:30, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> On 10/1/14 3:21 PM, Wayne Carr wrote:
>>> There could be a Call for Review public mail list.
>> Agree [and it might even be useful if the `right` people subscribe ;-)].
>>
>> In case you did not know, the [chairs] list is already used to: 1) 
>> make FPWD transition requests [rarely do these fail]; 2) announce LC 
>> publications + explicit  RfC from specific group(s); 3) make CR 
>> transition requests. It would be helpful (vis--vis toward getting 
>> early and wide review) if all three of these (plus ProcDoc-2014 now 
>> effectively mandates a "RfC for pre-CRs") were announced on a Public 
>> list.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the chairs list is Member-confidential and I suspect 
>> subscriber membership is controlled by consortium staff (i.e. I don't 
>> think it is an  auto-subscribe-able list by Joe Public). I would be 
>> delighted if everything on that list was automagically forwarded to a 
>> Public list. However, I suspect typical Public vs. Member 
>> confidentiality stop energy would prevent that :-(.
> Can W3C staff just make this list?
> public-wg-call-for-review@w3.org or public-wg-rfc@w3c.org
>
> - posts should only be from WG Chairs and W3C Staff
> - notices:
>      + Staff sends announcements at: transition requests, "last call"
> publications - FPWD and the CRs that have substantive changes or Last Call (under the old process), notice that work is underway on a charter
>      + WG Chairs send RfC on anything the WG would like feedback on or 
> that they would like to tell the public.  e.g. want review on a 
> particular section, notice that a section is considered stable
>
> This could just be done and WGs use it as they see fit and the process could later mandate it (if that was wanted).  In the meantime, it would be something WGs and W3C staff could use as a way of asking for reviews or making general announcements on spec development.
>
>> (WRT `the tools will save us`, if WG charter deliverables included 
>> some type of "interestedGroup" property, then it seems like at least 
>> some notifications could be automated.)
>>
>> -AB
>>
>> [chairs] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 18:36:33 UTC

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