W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2008

Re: tracker already has ternary state - RAISED

From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 21:23:08 +0100
To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Cc: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>, www-archive@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org
Message-Id: <20080605200746.M27248@hicom.net>

aloha, rob!

you bring up a very good point in regards bugzilla -- should bugzilla
be reserved solely for logging and tracking bugs in the WG's drafts --
for example, an error in sample code, failure to mark an attribute as 
globally applicable, grammatical and spelling errors, and the like?

i personally agree that the wiki was and is intended to facilitate 
discussion in detail on issues, and i, as well as other WG members, 
have used it to log detailed discussions and comparative proposals;
perhaps the "best" example of the wiki serving such a purpose is 
the wiki page on "Equivalent Content for Static Images", located at 
the (mis-leading) URI

http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/LongdescRetention

a quick review of the "info" page for this wiki page shows contributions 
from WG members as diverse as: rob burns, lachlan hunt, james graham, ben
boyle, charles mccathienevile, joshue o connor, andrew sidwell, jon
barnett, henri sivonen, scott lewis, sander tekelenburg, as well as 
myself (note: the preceding contributors' list is in no pariticular 
order)

in any event, clarification on use of tracker, the WG's wiki and 
bugzilla -- and how they interact, intersect and complement each 
other would be of utmost use to the entire HTML WG

gregory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.
                                                      -- Arthur Bloc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
   Gregory J. Rosmaita - oedipus@hicom.net AND gregory@ubats.org
        Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/
 United Blind Advocates for Talking Signs (UBATS): http://ubats.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>
Cc: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>,
"Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Chris
Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Laura Carlson
<laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>,
www-archive@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org
Sent: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 21:27:42 +0200
Subject: Re: tracker already has ternary state - RAISED

> Hi Gregory,
> 
> I like everything you proposed here. I would only add two things.
> 
> 1) It would be nice to have issue-tracker issues handled by WG 
> member  review like the sections of the draft. This way we ask 
> at least two WG  members to volunteer to review each issue and 
> provide a summary report  on their opinions on it. If need be 
> the chairs could also appoint  someone to review if the chairs 
> felt the volunteers didn't provide  enough balance.
> 
> 2) I'm not sure your proposal requires bugzilla at all then. I 
> think  the Wiki actually serves as a very good tool situated 
> between the  issue-tracker on one side and the [WINDOWS-1252?]WG’s
email, IRC 
> and telecon  deliberations/discussions. I've tried to 
> consistently setup each of  these issues I've raised to provide 
> a quick mailto link to contribute  to the WG discussion and 
> another quick email search link to find the  messages with that 
> same subject. This provides a nice way to link the  wiki to the 
> email discussions (I'm thinking of trying to do something  
> similar for IRC). Email and IRC provide a nice persistent log of 
> the  discussions while the Wiki pages can evolve to reflect the 
> feedback  and criticisms form the WG. The Issue-tracker then 
> provides a nice  mechanism to stay on top of what's going on.
> 
> Other than those two points, I fully support your suggestion.
> 
> Take care,
> Rob
> 
> On Jun 5, 2008, at 9:02 PM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
> 
> > aloha, josh!
> >
> > my open question to/request of the chairs -- which i made sure was  
> > logged
> > in IRC at today's telecon -- is as follows: when one opens an issue,  
> > it is
> > not marked as "OPEN", but rather as "RAISED" -- can the chairs in  
> > their
> > capacity as chairs, therefor, issue a formal statement to the effect  
> > that:
> >
> > * RAISED equals PROPOSED - proposal will be discussed on list and in
> >  at least 1 telecon before marked as OPEN or quashed
> >
> > * OPEN equals UNDER ACTIVE CONSIDERATION BY WG
> >
> > * CLOSE equals Editors/Chairs consider issue resolved - note that
> >  issues should be closed only after being addressed at a telecon, so
> >  that if there is dissent over the resolution, it can be logged and
> >  objectors should be given an opportunity to convince the chairs that
> >  the issue should not be closed
> >
> > or provide the rationale for not considering "RAISED" issues as  
> > "PROPOSED"?
> >
> > bugzilla could then be reserved for micro-issues and detailed  
> > discussion
> > thereof, thus avoiding the bifurcation of feedback streams that using
> > bugzilla to propose issues would cause...
> >
> > gregory
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > CONSERVATIVE, n.  A statesman who is enamored of existing evils,
> > as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them
> > with others.         -- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >             Gregory J. Rosmaita, oedipus@hicom.net
> >  Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
> > To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> > Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>,
> > Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Laura Carlson
> > <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>,
> > www-archive@w3.org, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>, "Gregory J.  
> > Rosmaita"
> > <oedipus@hicom.net>
> > Sent: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:43:34 +0100
> > Subject: Re: discretion & the issue tracker (was Re: discretion in  
> > adding
> > issues)
> >
> >> Steven Faulkner wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>> Why can't there be a 'proposal tracker' implemented that is open to
> >>> anyone in the working group to add proposals to, via a form perhaps
> >>> that asks for certain information about the proposal, so it can then
> >>> be evaluated and debated by WG members?
> >>
> >> That sounds like a good idea to me also.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Josh
> > ------- End of Original Message -------
------- End of Original Message -------
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2008 20:24:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:18 GMT