W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > October 2012

Re: Scope of comment system?

From: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:41:14 +0100
Cc: public-webplatform@w3.org
Message-Id: <04F43101-95BE-4B93-9478-D05D587C669E@opera.com>
To: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>, "jonathan@garbee.me" <jonathan@garbee.me>
I am increasingly getting this feeling too. I definitely think we should refrain from using the discussion pages, even thought they are useful for recording things like editorial discussions that you don't want the average reader to see. But we should instead have a section of the edit forms for recording such content, so we don't end up with two pages to do the job of one, for each article.

Flags are useful, but very hard to track/follow up on. To keep this manageable, should we split the articles up into sections, and give different people responsibility for each one, to check each load of articles over every month or so, to make sure there is no outstanding work to do on each one? and/or do we need a giant admin tool that shows us the status of every page on the site, along with outstanding work on each one? This is going to get really hard to track.

In my mind, editorial comments are really for recording small notes on changes needed to the wording/content/structure of pages. The bugzilla should be used for larger requests. Although editorial comments again seem really hard to track. Can you see an overview of them all somewhere? It also doesn't seem possible to get rid of them, or mark them as resolved when they are completed.

Should we get rid of them, and just use bugzilla? Or even better, perhaps we could combine the two somehow? Make it so that you can enter in bugzilla a URL pointing to a document fragment on WPD, and if it is a valid one, the bugzilla comment shows up at that position on WPD? And then when you resolve that comment, it no longer shows up on WPD? And when you click an "Add comment" button on a WPD page, you can enter a comment, and let generates an entry in bugzilla?

Thoughts?

Chris Mills
Open standards evangelist and dev.opera.com editor, Opera Software
Co-chair, web education community group, W3C
Author of "Practical CSS3: Develop and Design" (http://my.opera.com/chrismills/blog/2012/07/12/practical-css3-my-book-is-finally-published)

* Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
* Learn about the latest open standards technologies and techniques: http://dev.opera.com
* Contribute to web education: http://www.w3.org/community/webed/

On 25 Oct 2012, at 01:55, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> wrote:

> I'm not entirely sure (I'd love for others to chime in), but if I remember correctly the thinking was that using the "Discussion" pages feature in MediaWiki wasn't going to cut it because it was too heavyweight.
> 
> I agree that we have too many tools (flags/editorial notes/comments/bugzilla) and don't have a great sense of what precisely to use each for.
> 
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:15 AM, <jonathan@garbee.me> wrote:
> I'm not quite sure exactly what the commenting system is for.  It seems to be getting used most for just general feedback like "Great Site" or "Looking good."  A few comments are trying to get content organized.  So what was the intended purpose of the comment system?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Garbee
> 
>  
> 
Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 14:41:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:57:34 UTC