W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > February 2011

Re: Documenting implicit assumptions?

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:49:57 +0100
Cc: public-xg-webid@w3.org
Message-Id: <E2DCC7C3-E05C-470A-A892-2F77CF292A8C@bblfish.net>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>

On 1 Feb 2011, at 05:43, Manu Sporny wrote:
> Why can't Nathan just add these issues to the WebID XG ISSUE tracker and
> you go from there? That way, the discussion has an issue associated with
> it from the start, it's easy to track, and we don't have to worry about
> getting lost in the churn of discussion.

Sounds good, I was just about to propose that in fact. The whole point of 
what I  am asking for is that issues be well separated, clearly specified, 
well  described, in as short as possible text, so that people can then 
rate them, and we can have well ordered discussions on a few of them at
a time, without people's contributions getting lost in the flow.

Stephane is already adding all the issues you raised and place in the bug 
database you put together Manu, into our bug database here. Doing that
was one of the very first action items we took.

Henry

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 08:52:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:22 UTC