Re: Submitting corrections to the road map

Excellent. That is my preferred approach but I wanted to follow
existing group practice.

Thanks again.
Steve Lee
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com


On 30 August 2018 at 11:44, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> I think it would be best to:
> - Branch
> - Create the PR
> - Email the rendered version (with highlights) to the list here for review.
>
> I did that previously and it seemed to work well.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Alastair
>
> On 30/08/2018, 11:23, "Steve Lee" <steve@opendirective.com> wrote:
>
>     I'll certainly add the highlights as you suggest, but GitHub PR
>     comments allow for discussion, which is another level or
>     collaboration.
>
>     If the usual workflow is for contributors to branch and commit that's
>     fine with me :) I'll do that.
>     Steve Lee
>     OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>
>
>     On 30 August 2018 at 11:18, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>     > Hi Steve,
>     >
>     > That's what I suggested adding a class of 'highlight' to any element you edit.
>     >
>     > E.g:
>     > <p class="highlight">Text...
>     >
>     > And in the head:
>     > <style> .highlight { background-color: yellow; }</style>
>     >
>     > Then in the rendered (rawgit) version any change is highlighted.
>     >
>     > Obviously that isn't accessible for people who can't see it, but the github diff version is better for that scenario.
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     >
>     > -Alastair
>     >
>     >
>     > On 30/08/2018, 10:44, "Steve Lee" <steve@opendirective.com> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Looks like I still have commit access, but will make a Pull Request
>     >     (PR) anyway as a good workflow and in case there are any comments.
>     >
>     >     However I am concerned a GitHub PR with embedded comments will not be
>     >     easily accessible for everyone here so will restrict to symbols
>     >     editorial changes as you suggest.
>     >     Steve Lee
>     >     OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>     >
>     >
>     >     On 30 August 2018 at 09:29, Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com> wrote:
>     >     > Thanks Alastair, that's great.
>     >     >
>     >     > Steve Lee
>     >     > Sent from my mobile device Please excuse typing errors
>     >     >
>     >     > On Thu, 30 Aug 2018, 08:58 Alastair Campbell, <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>     >     >>
>     >     >> Hi Steve,
>     >     >>
>     >     >> That would be great, the latest version is here:
>     >     >> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/index.html
>     >     >>
>     >     >> I think the only difference with the editors draft is that Appendix A has
>     >     >> been moved out of the doc.
>     >     >>
>     >     >> Making a branch from here: https://github.com/w3c/coga/ (e.g. stevelee-qa)
>     >     >> would be great.
>     >     >>
>     >     >> To make it easier for others to review, I previously added a class of
>     >     >> 'update' to any element I changed, and put a bit of CSS in the head to
>     >     >> highlight it with a yellow background. (That's removed before merging.)
>     >     >>
>     >     >> For QA/typos and adding missing sections that is a good process. For
>     >     >> things that are more than QA, e.g. moving or removing things, I suggest
>     >     >> posting the suggestion here first.
>     >     >>
>     >     >> Kind regards,
>     >     >>
>     >     >> -Alastair
>     >     >>
>     >     >>
>     >     >> On 29/08/2018, 13:16, "Steve Lee" <steve@opendirective.com> wrote:
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     In reading the published Roadmap and gap analysis I spotted a few
>     >     >> type-os
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     How do you want them submitted?
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     My natural inclination is to provide a PR with changes to
>     >     >>       https://github.com/w3c/coga/blob/master/gap-analysis/index.html
>     >     >>     but I doubt that is the correct process, especially as the source is
>     >     >>     not mention in the published doc.
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     Plus I was reading the
>     >     >>     https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/WD-coga-gap-analysis-20180607/ and not the
>     >     >>     editors draft.
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     How should more detailed comments be passed on - via this list?
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     Thanks
>     >     >>
>     >     >>     Steve Lee
>     >     >>     OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>     >     >>
>     >     >>
>     >     >>
>     >     >
>     >
>     >
>
>

Received on Thursday, 30 August 2018 11:40:35 UTC