- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 16:46:43 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Review async poll results`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: Review async poll results<br> <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9438<br> <fantasai> lea: We have a few more votes than we did... let me try to pull up the links<br> <fantasai> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7542#issuecomment-1747805436<br> <fantasai> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9102#issuecomment-1747785298<br> <fantasai> lea: One poll was about sizing form controls by contents<br> <fantasai> lea: we have 10 votes in that<br> <fantasai> lea: I'll leave up to you whether that was a success or not<br> <fantasai> lea: I still wouldn't say there's exactly consensus<br> <fantasai> s/10/11<br> <florian> q+<br> <fantasai> lea: Plus 25 votes from non-WG members<br> <fantasai> lea: there does seem to be a clear consensus there for `field-sizing` although ppl are proposing other names<br> <fantasai> lea: but from non-WG members strong preference `field-sizing`, also from poll that jensimmons posted<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: sounds like this suggests field-sizing<br> <TabAtkins> yup, field-sizing looks pretty decisive to me<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: Looking through comments and engagement from non-members, curious... how much additional complexity would such async polls add to us?<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: additional names are being suggested, this seems polls + continued conversation<br> <fantasai> fantasai: I think helps actually<br> <fantasai> https://twitter.com/csswg/status/1711816620534886464<br> <jensimmons> q+<br> <fantasai> fantasai: good to get the comments from authors, and ideas also<br> <plinss> q+<br> <Rossen_> ack florian<br> <Rossen_> ack jensimmons<br> <fantasai> fantasai: I think we got the information we needed, and higher quality than if we only had poll results themselves<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: Doing polls, whether ourselves or externally, these are not scientifically valid<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: if you study research and stats, there are so many flaws<br> <lea> +1, the point is to get to the best option, not to be rigid<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: so it means we can't lock ourselves into assuming that a poll is the truth. We still have to use our humanity. I like mixing differnet polls. We get valuable information.<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: we just need the quick way to get many more people involved in the conversation<br> <lea> q?<br> <Rossen_> ack plinss<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: very valuable in helping us get to the wisest choice<br> <florian> florian: voted for the minority choice, but no objection with the majority view<br> <TabAtkins> +1, point is to get a quick answer from a larger quorum, and see if there is a wide consensus. No different than our straw polls, which also still need interpretation.<br> <fantasai> plinss: one comment I saw was, why isn't this part of width/height properties<br> <fantasai> iank_: We covered this previously, basically lots of times when you trigger min/max content sizing<br> <fantasai> iank_: and lots of quirks tied into these input elements that we wanted to disable<br> <fantasai> iank_: so that's why we thought a switch on the algorithm was best<br> <florian> +1 to jensimmons<br> <fantasai> iank_: but we did discuss previously<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: Sounds like this is good input, and additional commentary although maybe distracting is also good signal<br> <TabAtkins> plinss, https://twitter.com/tabatkins/status/1712147099951968699<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: So next question is, can we take the results and resolve?<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: do we just accept the results?<br> <fantasai> florian, jensimmons, fantasai: no<br> <chrishtr> q+<br> <lea> data-informed instead of data-driven :)<br> <fantasai> jensimmons: the poll isn't determinitive, it's informative, we still make the decisions as usual<br> <Rossen_> ack chrishtr<br> <fantasai> fantasai: We should take each issue, and in consideration of the poll, make the decision<br> <fantasai> chrishtr: Yes, let's take each issue<br> <florian> The proposal is: field-sizing: content | fixed<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9438#issuecomment-1758094849 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2023 16:46:45 UTC