[Minutes] 2016-04-15

The minutes of today's meting are at 
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/15-dwbp-minutes

The BP doc remains frozen while reviews are completed.

Deadline for review comments: Wednesday 20th

Editors will present issues and decisions next week, Friday 22, which is 
a holiday in Brazil.

We will assess then whether or not a vote is likely the following week.

A text snapshot of today's minutes is provided below.


       Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

15 Apr 2016

    [2]Agenda

       [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160415

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/15-dwbp-irc

Attendees

    Present
           PWinstanley, phila, Yaso, annette_g, Caroline,
           riccardoAlbertoni, yaso, BernadetteLoscio, antoine,
           laufer, ericstephan, newton

    Regrets
 Dee
    Chair
           yaso_

    Scribe
           phila

Contents

      * [4]Topics
      * [5]Summary of Action Items
      * [6]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <yaso_> New agenda
    **[7]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160415

       [7] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160415

    <scribe> scribe: phila

    <scribe> scribenick: phila

    PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes
    [8]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

       [8] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

    <yaso_> +1

    <riccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <antoine> +1

    +1

    <Caroline> +1

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1

    <PWinstanley> +1

    RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
    [9]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

       [9] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

    <ericstephan> +1

    yaso_: I was going to cancel the meeting today after Phil and
    Annette's concerns, but I suggest we can discuss the last
    changes
    ... But it looks like only Phil and Annette had time to read
    the doc carefully.
    ... I had a message from Augusto from the ministry of planning
    asking how he can contribute
    ... He wants to read the doc entirely
    ... Phi's suggestoons make sense, so I'm inclined to make this
    a 30 minute meeting
    ... so we can finish early and go to read the document
    ... Pay some attention to the changes and see what's the most
    important.
    ... So can Annette start by talking about the changes?
    ... Or the editors?

    annette_g: I can just say that there's a list... I've been
    going through each BP more carefully than for a while.

    <Caroline> -1 to finish this meeting earlier

    annette_g: In my defnece, things have been changing rapidly,
    which is all to the good. It's becoming a doc I can get behind.
    ... But when I look I keep finding more that I want to comment
    on.

    <Caroline> I think we should use this meeting to discuss issues
    that have been raised

    annette_g: But I have given it a lot of time.
    ... I hope that we can work through these things and make it
    better.

    BernadetteLoscio: I'd like to thank Phil and Annette for the
    detailed review.
    ... Phil for correcting the English
    ... Happy that we have a good feedback
    ... It's just good if we had had this before of course so we
    can continue with the schedule.
    ... We made some updates on the examples so that we have
    examples for all the BPs.
    ... Some comments are easy to address, others are not so easy,
    especially because they concern sections that are not... we had
    a lot of discussion about specific sections
    ... and we don't feel comfortable just changing according to
    the suggestions. We'll need WG discussion.
    ... SO we need more time, but we also need a deadline

    <yaso_> +1 to BernadetteLoscio for the deadlines

    BernadetteLoscio: By when WG members will complete the review,
    and now you can make the updates and set up issues.
    ... We need the feedback and we need the deadline.

    yaso_: May I suggest the deadline will be 2 weeks' time.

    BernadetteLoscio: I think that's too long. We need to publish
    the LC
    ... So I think 2 weeks is too long. If we have to update the
    doc after that it's going to take too long.
    ... The document is frozen last week, we had a week when we
    couldn't make any updates.
    ... If we stay 2 more weeks without working I think that's too
    long.

    yaso_: OK, but I'm trying to accomodate everyone's suggestions.
    ... It's true that the Wg wasn't god at providing feedback on
    time.
    ... Maybe one more week.

    <annette_g> one week would be enough for me.

    ericstephan: I have a general comment. From an editor's
    perspective, it's exhausting.
    ... I can't imagine all the things the editors are going
    through.
    ... To capture all of these comments, I wonder whether we
    should identify issues rather they and fix the doc. use the
    tracker.

    Caroline: I think Eric has a point. I wonder, it woujld be nice
    to hear from the WG - how long do you need.
    ... +1 to Eric on raising issues, then we can mark issues as
    having been solved.
    ... WE know the doc is very long.
    ... So we need to know how long reviers need.

    annette_g: I agree that we can do our reviews in less than 2
    weeks. 1 week is enough for me. We're getting to the point
    where we need to resolve these things.
    ... It's tempting to say there'll be another version. I'm
    feeling pressure that we need to finish.
    ... In the long run, it pays to handle these things earlier
    rather than later.

    BernadetteLoscio: What we are planning is to collect the
    comments and then try and group them in sections.
    ... The try to make the updates in a mroe consistent way.
    ... That's why a deadline for the reviews is nice.
    ... We want any disagreements to be obvious from the reviews.
    ... We won't update the doc yet. We'll come up with proposals.

    yaso_: Time frame?

    BernadetteLoscio: annette_g Suggested one more week to finish
    the review and then after that the review time is over. Then
    we'll start to update the doc.
    ... SO maybe we'll need another week to make the updates.

    <annette_g> you need separate non-review editorial time. If we
    take a week for reading, you need another week for editing.

    ericstephan: That sounds reasonable. But I see that sometimes
    we're getting into infinite loop about certain topics and I'd
    suggest that when we get to where there is no agreement, we
    need a place to submit issues.

    phila: Where there is no consensus - take that part out.

    yaso_: I think we should have a vote on the new time line
    ... The it's up to the editors to decide whether there is or
    isn';t agreement.

    laufer: A question for Phil, - if there is a deadline?
    ... We are in a loop. I don't understand how our comments can
    be too late.
    ... Otehrs will comment too. When does the loop end?
    ... If we have one week for comments, then a week for the
    editors, then we need another week to read what the editors
    have done - and we'll still have comments.
    ... What is the power of the editors to say - this is it.

    <annette_g> I spent a whole day, too

    phila: Talks about deadlines

    laufer: The main goal of this draft is to enable people to make
    implementations]
    ... If no on eof the group has objections about the BP
    collection and that they are clear, why can't we deliver this
    draft? We can make some changes
    ... But for me I would vote on the doc today.

    yaso_: Next Friday is a holiday in Brazil.

    phila: If I were to vote today, I would vote no.
    ... I should have done it weeks/months ago. So should you
    (everyone)
    ... I want to cancel next Friday's call, but set a deadline for
    comments
    ... of Wednesday, leaving 10 days for the editors to make their
    changes by 29/4
    ... Then it's up to the editors to see if we have consensus.

    laufer: We need a week with the frozen document.
    ... We will have the discussion, then the changes. We need the
    doc in a frozen state, So you think 5 days aren't enough.

    <BernadetteLoscio> I think we should keep the call

    Caroline: As yaso said, next friday is a holiday in Brazil, but
    we editors think we really should maintain this meeting. We're
    willing to go to the meeting next week.
    ... I guess non-Brazilians will be OK to be there.

    phila: You have your frozen document

    annette_g: I imagine there's enough in what Phil and I have
    written already that the editors could make a start
    ... you may not piush the changes but you can start

    BernadetteLoscio: Just to say that the doc will be frozen this
    week and Annete just said what we said, yes, we'll keep the doc
    frozen.

    <yaso_> acl laufer

    laufer: Last meeting we voted about 3 BPs about which I have
    strong objections.
    ... I'm OK with this, If we dont;' include things where we have
    strong objections, then we won't have a document

    Caroline: Just to make sure we discuss content next week
    ... We'll have feedback by mail, and then next week we can talk
    about content

    <ericstephan> +1 Caroline

    Caroline: So my proposal is that we keep discussing content and
    trying to figure out what changes to make. Next week we take
    the time to discuss the things that we can't resolve by e-mail.
    ... So we can finish editing the doc.

    yaso_: So we can vote next Friday?
    ... Not next Friday, the 29th
    ... I'm trying to make sure finish.
    ... On 22 we talk about changes and suggestions.
    ... Then on 29 we vote on publication.
    ... Correct Caroline?

    BernadetteLoscio: If we do this, then we won't have a week that
    the doc will be frozen again. This week the doc will be frozen.
    We'll work but we can't finish it.
    ... Then the week after to address the comments

    <BernadetteLoscio> great!

    <yaso_> +1 to phila

    <laufer> the problem is not the review... the problem is to
    have an agreement with the comments about the reviews....

    annette_g: I think we do need to include time for review just
    before the vote.
    ... There has to be some time for people to review what they're
    voting on. Maybe another week, or maybe a more granular time
    line
    ... WE do need a freeze before the vote

    yaso_: Following Phil's mood, I don't think we need another
    week of frozen document

    <ericstephan> :-)

    <laufer> we have serious problems when we have a not frozen
    document to vote...

    annette_g: Can we havea the diffs.

    <laufer> had*

    annette_g: I can't vote on a doc I haven't read.
    ... reading this big doc takes forever
    ... And we need time to do this

    <BernadetteLoscio> the idea is to review during the next weeks

    yaso_: It may not need a whole week

    <riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to yaso_

    annette_g: Indeed, it might not. Maybe a few days

    yaso_: I'm thinking 2 days
    ... So freeze on Wed 27

    <BernadetteLoscio> -1

    <laufer> +1

    annette_g: The Wed before the end of the month.

    <BernadetteLoscio> I dont agree with frozen again

    phila: The Diff tool is helpful.
    [10]http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fw3c.githu
    b.io%2Fdwbp%2Fbp.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fphilarcher1.github.io%2
    Fdwbp%2Fbp.html#dataFormats

      [10] 
http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fdwbp%2Fbp.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fphilarcher1.github.io%2Fdwbp%2Fbp.html#dataFormats

    <Caroline> -1 to frozen it again

    BernadetteLoscio: The editors need to speak!
    ... We don't agree with frozen again. Maybe we won't need it,
    maybe we will.
    ... I think what we should do, we have to review now and then
    the editors will mtry to solve the conflicts, make proposals
    ... and we'll try to do this in the next 2 weeks.
    ... Before 29th, we need to have an agreement. If we don't have
    agreement, then we decide on 29th
    ... We need people to make the review now.
    ... It's not fair to give 2 more days of a froizen doc. That's
    not fair on us.
    ... If we're not ready, we'll say so.

    yaso_: I really think people need a day or two to read the doc

    <annette_g> +1 to yaso

    yaso_: and we ned to close the loop. The 2 days are not to make
    chages, it's to read the doc before the voting.
    ... I think we need the time to read the doc, not to change it.
    Changes come before hand.
    ... the frozen days are to read the doc.
    ... ANd I agree with Berna that we have to make an effort to be
    ready for 29

    <laufer> What will happend if someone do not agree with the new
    frozen document? I agree with Bernadette that the issues have
    to be solved in the email discussion. We have then to trust
    that the changes will be done.

    <laufer> And then vote.

    <ericstephan> 22

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1 to laufer

    phila: Scribe interrupt - what ahppens next week?

    Wednesday 20th - deadline for comments

    Friday 22 - discuss changes

    BernadetteLoscio: It's like Laufer said, if we freeze, the loop
    is endless. We need a firm deadline

    <laufer> Let´s say that we need 1 day to read the document that
    will be voted. And made our thinking about our vote.

    <Caroline> I kindly ask that we solve this before ending this
    meeting

    <annette_g> I cannot in good conscience agree to publish a
    document whose content I don't know.

    [Discussion continues around deadlines and freezing]

    <Caroline> please let Annette and Antoine talk

    <Caroline> please!!!

    annette_g: If we're going to do a vote, we need a chnace to
    read the doc in a stavble state. Small changes addressing other
    people's issues will potentially make the doc disagreeable to
    others.

    <laufer> 1 day for reading a document that we have already
    read.

    annette_g: It's unfair to ask people to vote on something they
    haven't read

    <BernadetteLoscio> yes, that's the idea!!!! :)

    <ericstephan> +1 antoine

    antoine: I was about to ask whether it's possibel tuse this
    diff tool so that we'd have a snapshot every day. So you can
    see the day before the vote you get a quick overbiew of changes

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1 to Antoine!!!!!

    antoine: The you're voting on something that is under control.

    yaso_: SO next week we'll discuss the changes

    <Caroline> we will do what Antoine proposed. Does everyone
    agree?

    yaso_: And the agenda is to look at changes made betwene now
    and then.

    <laufer> +1 to antoine

    <Caroline> we will send emails with the changes

    <ericstephan> 20

    Wednesday 20 - deadlien for review comments

    <BernadetteLoscio> yes

    Friday 22 we'll discuss issues arising from the review

    between Friday 22 - and Wednesday 27th, nightly diffs?

    <BernadetteLoscio> +q

    yaso_: Stick to that timeline to next friday and then decide
    ... So Wednesday is the deadline for commnets
    ... from the WG. We can't predict the future

    <laufer> may we extend this meeting a little more?

    yaso_: (scribe paraphrase)

    <Zakim> Caroline, you wanted to answer annette_g

    BernadetteLoscio: Our idea is what Antoine said - we'll discuss
    the comments from Phil and Annete ASAP
    ... when we have a proposal, we'll make it
    ... And we'll start on that now
    ... We're going to show every update to the group.
    ... That's why I don't think it will be necessary to freeze.
    Look at the changes and comment immediately.

    newton: +1 to BernadetteLoscio
    ... We don't need a snapshot
    ... We'll let the WG know every change we commit to github

    yaso_: We should focus oin the netx week and decide what to do
    next Friday.
    ... we'll decide more then.
    ... So we decide next week on whetehr a freeze is necessary
    ... So thanks all. Please read the doc and suggest the changes
    before the voting.

    <yaso_> +1 to phila

    <riccardoAlbertoni> bye .. .

    <ericstephan> bye everyone

    <yaso_> bye all!

    <annette_g> bye!

    <laufer> bye all...

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [11]Accept last week's minutes
        https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________

Received on Friday, 15 April 2016 15:05:31 UTC