- 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