- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:29:23 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8892 --- Comment #5 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-02-07 14:29:22 --- (In reply to comment #4) > I'll postulate that the reaction to the changes is addressing a symptom, but > not the underlying problem. My observation is when an edit is made in an area > related to a Change Proposal that is under active discussion, but that change > itself is not accompanied by an email describing the intent and thinking behind > the change (was it a baby step? is it thought to address the entire issue? > why was this particular approach instead of the one proposed by the change > proposal?), then people are left to discover the change, and many tend to react > to the change based on their worst possible fears of what might happen. > > My suggestion is that instead of focusing on the timing of the edits, we should > focus on the lack of communication. > > We should also make it clear that such changes to editor's drafts are > provisional, and do not, in them selves, constitute Working Group Decisions. > I agree that communication is a problem, but I don't see the lack of communication being addressed, so all one can do is try to formalize the process. I think it acceptable to ask that the editor propose his changes to the group, first. We cannot have a discussion within the HTML5 document, we can in the email list. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 7 February 2010 14:29:24 UTC