- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 20:18:30 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13003 Summary: Define role of Editorial Assistants Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: working group Decision Policy AssignedTo: mjs@apple.com ReportedBy: Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: mjs@apple.com, Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com, rubys@intertwingly.net, mike@w3.org The Chairs have issued a call for Editorial Assistants: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jun/0218.html "The idea we have come up with is what I'll call, for lack of a better term, Editorial Assistants. In our forthcoming revised Decision Policy[1] we described how different bug resolutions should be used. A few resolutions can be set by anyone, but FIXED, NEEDSINFO, WONTFIX and LATER could only be set by the Editor, with a rationale. Editorial Assistants would work with the Editor of a spec and would be empowered to set NEEDSINFO, WONTFIX and LATER resolutions with appropriate rationale. If we can get a good set of assistants, this should significantly benefit the schedule, since these three resolutions are the most likely to lead to reopening and escalation. Editorial assistants would also be encouraged to resolve WORKSFORME, INVALID and DUPLICATE bugs (which anyone can do), and to adjust bug priorities based on their own judgment and requests from the Working Group. Actual drafting of spec text (and therefore FIXED resolutions) would be left up to the Editor." This role should be added to the Decision Policy. /paulc -- 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 Monday, 20 June 2011 20:18:35 UTC