W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > January 2015

Re: A suggestion: Add status flags to BPs?

From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 09:47:50 -0300
Message-ID: <CANx1PzzAxOC4-gPxx3P8b8r9EQqRjc_KyLdjecBQxgqg2YYJFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
Cc: Ghislain Atemezing <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, "public-dwbp-wg@w3.org" <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Phil,

I like the idea of rating BP, but I'm afraid that's gonna be hard to
make such rating now (we can always try). I'm not sure if we can say
to people that a BP may be tested if we didn't make any test
ourselves.

Maybe we can add a note on the introduction of the BP section to
reinforce that this a draft and some BP are unstable and need to be
tested, and people are welcome to give feedback about our proposals.

+1 to Eric!

Cheers,
Bernadette


2015-01-23 9:15 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>:
>>> I don’t see how we can use the “unstable” flag at the time we release the
>>> document as FPWD. It would be preferable to keep the “unstable” ones in our
>>> back-end/wiki/work-in-progress status .
>
> Ghislain,
>
> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but this is a draft.   Even conveying an
> unstable BP might still be useful.   In the case of the BP on privacy I'd
> rather rate that as unstable until we've had a chance to get feedback from
> W3C privacy activity and other groups.
>
> Eric S
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:00 AM, Ghislain Atemezing
> <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> Le 23 janv. 2015 à 12:32, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> a écrit :
>>
>> *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)
>>
>>
>> These are quite good options to look at during the next teleconf. However,
>> looking at the process of standardization, I presume that releasing a FPWD
>> means “hey folks there, we need your feedback”, that almost meaning all our
>> BPs sections are in “testing” flag. And getting to “recommendation” will
>> means we have all the BP “stable”. What I mean is that, I don’t see how we
>> can use the “unstable” flag at the time we release the document as FPWD. It
>> would be preferable to keep the “unstable” ones in our
>> back-end/wiki/work-in-progress status .
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ghislain
>>
>



-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 23 January 2015 12:56:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 23 January 2015 12:56:33 UTC