- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:48:35 -0500
- To: public-html-wg-issue-tracking <public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
I've been thinking and talking about a schedule of issues for a while, e.g. [01 Aug] My sense of due process says that development groups, peer working groups, and such should get 3 to 6 weeks notice in preparation for a Working Group decision on an issue. Here's a suggestion for actually closing some issues: 21 Aug 28 Aug ISSUE-55 head-profile 4 Sep 11 Sep ISSUE-32 table-summary 18 Sep ISSUE-31 missing-alt 25 Sep 2 Oct 9 Oct 16 Oct 23 Oct (TP week) ISSUE-41 Decentralized-extensibility (requirement) 30 Oct I'd like to fit some more requirements issues in the schedule leading up to the TP week; this is just a starting sketch. I also suggest we demote many/most of our OPEN issues to RAISED, and discourage discussion of issues that aren't OPEN. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/open I chatted with Mike about this briefly, but I haven't run it by Chris W. and of course I'm interested in any feedback from others. This is pretty much consistent with the existing state definitions, though it might be worth explicitly modifying them: [[ Tracker Issue State Definitions * RAISED = Issue tracker staff suggests this is worth a WG discussion and potentially a decision. * OPEN = The Chairs agree this is worth WG discussion; preferably, a working group member is assigned an ACTION to follow up (similar to ASSIGNED). ]] -- http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML [01 Aug] [[ As to decisions and escalation... as Ian notes, he makes zillions of decisions every week or even every day... and this Working Group as a whole has only made 6 decisions, formally ... It's not reasonable to expect all interested parties to watch Ian's IRC chatter 24x7 so that they can engage when issues of interest to them come up. Laura pointed out the escalation to tracker ( http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/ ) and the weekly teleconference, but I can't really say that's a well-oiled machine yet. I hope we'll find a better balance with respect to due process soonish. ]] -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Aug/0037.html -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 18:47:39 UTC