Re: A suggestion: Add status flags to BPs?

Phil and all,

I like your idea about applying a rating system to each BP to help the
reader gain an understanding of the state of each BP.

At this point I'd rather get public feedback, even if it might not be
pleasant if it leads to better insights.  My greatest concern at this point
is that we say 'no' to publication without a specific plan to move forward
and we go back to micro subject discussions not really adding any new value.

+1 to your reference to Makx comments "how do we know that any of these are
Best Practices? Where's the evidence?"   public comments again might help
us develop this better.


Eric S

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:32 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The level of discussion around the BP doc since the beginning of the month
> has been terrific. From my POV, the WG is now working very well. Compare
> current discussions with those of, say, 6 months ago. When we get to
> discussing things like whether a BP is a MUST or a SHOULD - that's detailed
> standards work.
>
> This is good and it's what we're here to do.
>
> It's also clear that we have significant work still to do before we will
> agree a number of issues among ourselves, let alone among the wider
> community we are trying to serve.
>
> In a few hours' time, Deirdre's planning to ask the group whether or not
> it feels comfortable publishing the FPWD of the doc. Looking at the
> comments and substantive discussions my conclusion is that the answer is
> likely to be no.
>
> *However* I have a suggestion that I hope might be useful. As well as the
> issues that are raised in the doc, I think we could add a flag to each BP
> that would follow the (well known among some) pattern of
>
> - Unstable (don't trust this one folks!)
> - Testing (what do you think? Any implementation feedback you can give us?)
> - Stable (we think we're done)
>
> (see http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns)
>
> We could use other terms but it might take us a month to decide which ones
> so I suggest that for today, we either adopt these thee options or not.
>
> That would allow us to indicate our own level of confidence in each BP,
> thus allowing us to formally publish something with much less fear of "you
> said do what??!!"
>
> In terms of today's meeting we might run through all the BPs and get a
> sense of which were at each of those three levels?
>
> Incidentally, I was struck particularly by one of Makx's comments
> yesterday: how do we know that any of these are Best Practices? Where's the
> evidence?
>
> That's an important point and, when we get to the later stages of the
> process, essential. We do actually have to *prove* that people have
> followed these BPs successfully. It's part of the community engagement work
> that any standard needs.
>
> Phil.
>
> --
>
>
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
>
>