- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 14:06:02 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21806 --- Comment #1 from Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> --- I'd prefer EDITOR's RESPONSE rather than EDITOR'S DECISION, as many confuse Editor's proposed resolutions as Working Group Decisions. I'd prefer a more specific URL, something like http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#basic-step-2 And perhaps to make it even more stable, changing the anchor to #editors-response. --- As to how the decision policy itself would need to change, clearly the boilerplate would have to be removed, the description of the resolutions can stay, and the part of the boilerplate that talks about potential next steps becomes part of the text of the decision policy. What needs to be discussed is the following bullets: * A clear statement of whether the comment was accepted or rejected. * A rationale for the change or lack of change (at least enough for the Disposition of Comments). * A link to the relevant spec diff or diffs, if the spec was changed. The proposed boilerplace covers #2, but doesn't clearly cover #1 and #3. My take is that these are reasonable items for people to expect in a proposed resolution. Thoughts? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 14:06:08 UTC