W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > February 2019

Keeping track of comments

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 15:55:32 -0800
To: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5bd7d3a3-5b3f-4531-9e80-68959a677d74@kcoyle.net>
It is important that we take care with our recording of comments and the
responses from the working group. This is complicated greatly by the mix
of comment methods between the comments mailing list and github. It is
also complicated by the fact that we have multiple deliverables and
subgroups. We would therefore like to better organize our treatment of
comments and our record keeping so that we will be able to show W3C
management a true picture of our outreach. This also becomes especially
important as we move toward candidate recommendation status.

To begin with, all comments and suggestions are to be considered and
discussed by the working group. That doesn't mean that all comments will
result in changes, but all must received a considered response from the
group. Often comments indicate that more explanation is needed, and the
group should respond with analysis and clarification, quite possibly
adding clarification to the deliverable itself. (Note: co-chairs to add
comments to plenary meeting agenda as project management points;
subgroups to include them for in-depth discussion.)

Comments should get an initial "thank you" that will let the commenter
know that they've been heard. Each deliverable must have a designated
"responder" who takes care of this. The working group should discuss the
comment until it is clear if changes are needed or if a clarification
should be sent. Before responding to a comment, a draft response needs
to be approved by the working group so that the group's involvement is
recorded in the minutes of the plenary where the response is approved.

For our own record-keeping, we need a place where comments are recorded,
such as a github wiki page where we can link to github or email
comments. We suggest the following for our record-keeping:

1. name of commenter
2. community represented, if named
3. link to comment
4. summary of comment(s)
5. Link to meeting (resolution, if possible) approving response
6. Link to response (email or github)
7. Link to change (or "no change")

For #4, each comment should have a few bullet points to indicate the
salient content of the comment (e.g. suggests change from ex:term1 to
nn:term2).

Because we're coming to this a bit late, let's concentrate on current
and future comments, and we can fill in the past ones when/if convenient
or necessary.

We'll put this on the next plenary agenda where we can finalize how we
want to work with comments.
-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Saturday, 9 February 2019 23:55:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:12 UTC