W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: a question about LC comments

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 10:23:40 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030206095519.029f2130@rockynet.com>
To: Olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 12:20 PM 2/6/03 +0900, Olivier Thereaux wrote:
>On Thursday, Feb 6, 2003, at 00:00 Asia/Tokyo, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>>The Status sections of OpsGL and SpecGL say, effectively, "please use the 
>>form, or if you are for some reason unable to use the form, please send 
>>email to www-qa@w3.org".
>>
>>Oliver's form will nicely send or put the issue, in XML markup form, 
>>somewhere for the issue editors.  The issue editors will integrate those 
>>individual issues into the cumulative Last Call Issues List.
>
>Would you be happy if the form sent 3 mails (instead of 2 currently):
>  - thank you note to commenter
>  - issue to editor (in XML)
>  - issue (plain-text) to www-qa

I can see pros and cons, mild (IMO) in both cases.

Con:
---

1. the Issue doesn't have a number or mnemonic id yet (the number will be 
added by a merge process);

2. too much volume of raw material for the IG list?

(Olivier, I think that you propose that the XML markup goes only to the LC 
Issues Editor, correct?)

Pro:
---

3. less work for Issues Editor(s) [or ... for 'responsible']

In some sense, I think a better solution is a periodic message to IG with a 
1-line summary that is linked to the Issues List, and an invitation to look 
and comment.  I.e., I wonder if a volume of raw-material messages might not 
just dull everyone's attention, and make people tune 'em out ("..oh boy, 
another 27 QA last call issues in my IN box").

This does mean that an IG co-chair, or the issues editor, or the 
'responsible' person for the issue will have to prepare and send the 
message (i.e., more work for us).  On the other hand, I already have a 
simple stylesheet (XSLT) that pulls the issue number and 1-line description 
out of our XML issues database.  It would probably be easy enough to add a 
'date' test (to extract only new issues on weekly basis), and even a 
'responsible' dependency -- i.e., it could be mostly automated.

Other thoughts?

(We can talk Monday as well -- our agenda isn't too overloaded yet.)

-Lofton.
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2003 12:20:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:12 GMT