Re: [web audio] I18N self-review? [I18N-ACTION-756]

Addison,

Thanks for the confirmation. In retrospect I should of course have 
followed up on our verbal conversation by email on on an issue 
somewhere, just to have a discoverable paper trail. No-one can keep all 
this in their heads.

--
Chris

On 26-Sep-18 17:26, Phillips, Addison wrote:
>
> Hello Chris,
>
> Thanks for the note back.
>
>     As near as I can tell, your WG did not request a review from the
>     I18N WG.
>
> We did, and got one, but you can certainly be forgiven for forgetting 
> about it.
>
> I discussed it with you face to face at TPAC 2016 (yes, we really have 
> been "almost ready for CR" for two years now).
>
> AP> I dimly recall having that conversation, but of course didn’t 
> connect it with this spec lo these two years later. As it happens, our 
> record-keeping is based on what’s in our github radar plus formal 
> requests via the email list (www-international@ or public-i18n-core@). 
> These don’t include webaudio, so I assumed we had missed you along the 
> way. Apologies for the spotty record-keeping on our part.
>
> The transition request was eventually sent on 6 September 2018 (after 
> the second TAG review and the Privacy review had concluded). 
> Transition requests have a built-in one week delay to allow other 
> chairs to indicate that they are not done reviewing a document, or 
> have unaddressed concerns.
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2018JulSep/0115.html
>
> AP> I am subscribed to chairs and do look for transreqs. I am also on 
> the notifications list (in case I miss the transreq). In this case, I 
> saw the transition announcement on chairs@. In case it isn’t clear: 
> this is a manual process to ensure that WGs that haven’t formally 
> requested a review (i.e. most of them) get the form letter you just 
> received.
>
> I'm just checking that you are subscribed to chairs and see the 
> transition request emails? Nowadays the email to chairs is first 
> developed on a transitions GitHub repo.
> https://github.com/w3c/transitions
>
> AP>I am on chairs. I was not aware of this repo until just now and 
> have watched it. Thank you!
>
>     Assuming otherwise and based on the transition announcement, I
>     have added your document to our review radar [3].
>
> Thanks. Any further review will of course be welcome.
>
> AP> We found one minor issue 
> (https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/598 if you want a 
> head-start) which will likely be reviewed in this week’s teleconference.
>
>     To that end, could you let us know:
>
>     1.Did you have a chance to perform a self-review or did you
>     otherwise consider requesting an I18N WG review?
>
> We requested one and, having described the scope and intent of the 
> API, were told by you that it was not needed for this sort of API that 
> does not have human-readable text strings, etc.
>
> AP> Yes, that’s generally true and—no offense—your spec was pretty 
> “boring” from an I18N perspective (which is what we want). In 
> retrospect, it’s usually better to request reviews in writing—so that 
> I put you into the appropriate bucket, but don’t let that stop you 
> from verbally requesting them at a F2F somewhere, such as TPAC. I try 
> to capture these in radar also. Also, note that doing the self-review 
> exercise is often useful—you know more about your spec than I will 
> even once I’ve read it.
>
>     2.Were you aware of horizontal reviews as part of the process? If
>     not, how can we better make you aware or make it easier to work
>     with us?
>
> We were fully aware, and as the transition request makes clear we had 
> a fair bit of horizontal review - not one but two TAG reviews, 
> accessibility discussions, a very full privacy and security review, as 
> well as your own.
>
> Sorry that it took us so long to finally request CR transition that 
> you had forgotten about us!
>
> AP> Sorry for the fire drill. As noted, I am starting to resort to 
> form letters because, in fact, many transreqs have not requested a 
> review for me to forget about. In this case, you did the right thing. 
> Thank you for your help.
> Kind regards,
> Addison
>
> Addison Phillips
>
> Sr. Principal SDE – I18N (Amazon)
>
> Chair (W3C I18N WG)
>
> Internationalization is not a feature.
>
> It is an architecture.
>
-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media