- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:37:20 -0700
- To: shane@aptest.com
- Cc: public-forms@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF5A55DE1C.049B65DA-ON88257314.00631D93-88257314.00664ED1@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Shane, The Forms WG has been using your issue tracking system with success for XForms 1.1 last call issues. Here are some of the more popular states of an issue along with an indication of when we choose them: Open - The problem has been created in the DB and awaits working group consideration Needs Approval - One or more members of the working group has considered the problem and proposed a response or a technical direction for the working group to review Approved - The working group has considered the problem, resolved to "Accept" or "Modify and Accept" a proposed resolution to the issue, and an action item has been assigned to produce spec ready text Implemented - The spec ready text is available in the editor's draft or a public update to the spec, and the reply has been delivered to the last call commenter Note that I am not concentrating on the other degenerate cases like closed, suspended, need feedback etc. but rather on states that correspond to a successful progression to the "Implemented" state. The "needs approval" category seems to be about recording information needed to get either an agreement in principle about how to proceed or to get an easier item closer to completion. I think something similar is needed for those harder issues where the group approves in principle and chooses a technical direction but decides it is necessary to review the final spec ready text. To support this, the following states seem like they would make valuable additions to the system: Approved for Review - The working group has considered the problem, resolved to "Accept" or "Modify and Accept" a proposed resolution to the issue, an action item has been assigned, but the group needs to review the spec ready text Needs Review - One or more working group members has done the assigned action item by preparing spec ready text and now wants the working group to review the result. These new states would allow the following reinterpretation of 'Approved': Approved - The working group has considered the problem, resolved to "Accept" or "Modify and Accept" a proposed resolution to the issue, and an action item has been assigned to produce spec ready text that may be directly implemented without further review of the working group The Approved state, then, is what happens after Open or Needs Approval for easier issues and after Needs Review for harder issues. What do you think of these ideas? Do you think it is possible to add these states (as well as these explanations of the states)? Finally, it seems like a description of the state progression is needed for the various other possible outcomes. For example, I am interpreting 'Closed' as something to be assigned when a last call comment is rejected. But is Closed also a state expected to occur after Implemented, and if so, what work would be expected between Implemented and Closed? I suppose I could imagine that state happening when a user response is received perhaps. Thanks, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 18:37:41 UTC