W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Call for Editors for Server-sent Events, Web Storage, and Web Workers

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:31:01 -0500
Message-ID: <4D07A9D5.4010309@nokia.com>
To: "ext Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Doug Schepers<schepers@w3.org>  wrote:
>> But we are looking for more than someone to just push TR copies, we want
>> someone who (like Ian) understands the issues, and knows how to help drive
>> progress through consensus and technical expertise, and who can dedicate
>> themselves to the task.
> Can we get a bullet-point listing of the responsibilities for the
> desired position?  I've gone back and reread the OP, and I don't
> understand what exactly you're asking for.  I'm sure the
> responsibilities are hidden there, but the wordiness makes my eyes
> slide right over them.

Doug - thanks for starting this thread.

Tab - Doug indicated some of the tasks in the head of this thread:

[[
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010OctDec/0919.html

Previously, Art Barstow asked for an analysis of the current status of 
these specs, with regards to LC comments, implementations, test suites, 
and so forth; these are typically performed and coordinated by the 
editor of a spec, and it's appropriate that someone doing this work 
would get editor credit for their effort.
]]

The thread Doug alludes to above included some additional tasks:

[[
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010OctDec/0860.html

All of these specs have a Bugzilla component for issue and comment 
tracking, all are included in the WHATWG issue tracker at [Issues], all 
of the specs have changed since their LC was published and all of the 
specs had at least one comment submitted against the LC via public-webapps.

With respect to "does a spec need to return to LC or can it advance to 
Candidate?", Section 7.4.6 of W3C process says:

...

Since Hixie is active on HTML, perhaps someone else is willing to pick 
one of these LCs and to review the issues, bugs, diffs, etc. and propose 
the next step .

[Issues] http://www.whatwg.org/issues/
]]

I realize the W3C process can be a bit heavy weight, especially regaring 
LC comment processing and if you or anyone else can help, that would be 
great.

I don't think it is fair or reasonable to expect Hixie to do all of the 
work required to move a spec through the W3C process.

-Art Barstow
Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2010 17:31:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT