Re: X(HT)ML Fragment Identifiers

Hi Erik,

> @2008-06-12 19:08 -0700:
> one last time...
>
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> As far as Bugzilla goes, if we make it the group's issue-tracking  
>> mechanism I would be happy to give any issue that ends up on this list:
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=HTML+WG&bug_status=NEW 
>>                                        ...the same level of response 
>> that I give any e-mail sent to the WHATWG list; that is, given full 
>> consideration and given an explicit response. 
>
> i am proud to report that i am currently the only one on that list!  
> which of course makes me kind of suspicious about the issue handling  
> process.

I only made a decision to start using bugzilla quite recently. I
suspect we'll have some other issues entered there before too long.

> unless i hear otherwise, i will assume that being on that list
> is good enough to have "officially raised the issue".

The editor has said he will give full consideration and an
explicit response to any issues raised there, and from my side, I
will track the progress of all issues raised there.

> on the other hand, i have to admit that i (casually) used bugzilla in  
> other W3C activities, and while it kind of worked ok, it definitely is  
> not pretty and could use a little streamlining just to be a little less  
> awkward and cumbersome. if, for example, there would be an easy way to  
> just hide all the fields which are totally useless for specification  
> purposes, this would already clean up the interface substantially and  
> maybe make more people willing to use bugzilla.

I think the bugzilla may be doing shared use as a tracking system
not just for specs but also for open-source code maintained at
W3C, and those fields may be useful for that. So I think for now
at least we just need to find a way to live with them.

  --Mike

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/
http://sideshowbarker.net/