RE: ISSUE-204, ISSUE-30 and ISSUE-203 processing order

>> In addition you should expect the Chairs to give authors of change 
>> proposals for an issue that depends on a newly decided issue time to 
>> refactor or withdraw their CP in the face of a WG decision on the 
>> earlier decided issue.

First, we have an example of this in the thread at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jul/0103.html 
Note in this case we got a very rapid withdrawal of the impacted change proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jul/0105.html
This will allow us to move forward quite quickly - in this case on a CfC for ISSUE-183.  

> How much time is considered reasonable, especially in light of how much time we've spent discussing these three issues. A week? 10 days? 2 weeks?

I don't think the Chairs are willing to give a fixed time for someone to refactor their CP but it would not be longer than one month.  I expect we would negotiate this on a case by case basis.    See Maciej's email listed above for how we will contact the authors of impacted CPs.

> I hear: the Straw Poll for Issue 204 will probably go to survey by no later than Monday or Tuesday next, and reach a deadline for objections in-or-around July 30 or 31, which is 2 weeks from today. 
> Would that be a reasonable interpretation?

The Chairs are collecting input on ISSUE-204 and if we have no push back then the survey will occur as soon after Thu as we can get it ready.

> Given busy schedules, summer vacations and the fact that Aug. 1 is a holiday in many locations (including Ottawa <grin>), can the Chairs give us a best-guess estimate of how long they envision this high priority decision evaluation for Issue 204 will take? A week? Ten days? Two weeks? Longer?

I cannot commit my co-chairs but I think we would try to do this in about one week.

> Can we get some specific deadlines please?

Specific deadlines are not possible since we cannot anticipate the issue decisions, their impacts (if any) and the reactions of other WG members whose other CPs might be impacted.  In addition if we applied a maximum time for each step to get very specific deadlines then the deadlines might get changed if an impacted CP with withdrawn as for ISSUE-183 (see above example).

/paulc
HTML WG co-chair

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329


-----Original Message-----
From: John Foliot [mailto:john@foliot.ca] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 8:42 PM
To: Paul Cotton; public-html@w3.org; 'HTML Accessibility Task Force'
Subject: RE: ISSUE-204, ISSUE-30 and ISSUE-203 processing order

Paul Cotton wrote:
> 
> > Have the Chairs also identified a time-line to attach to this
> processing order? As all three identified Issues are now closed, and 
> with various Change Proposals in place already, I would presume that 
> there should not be much of a delay in starting this process, or 
> delays between Issue processing either.
> 
> >An approximate time-line and dates would be helpful and appreciated 
> >by
> many in the Working Group.
> 
> In general when we have issues that are dependent on each other you 
> should expect the Chairs to prioritize the earlier issues in the 
> precedence order with a higher priority than other WG issues.

Cool.

> 
> In addition you should expect the Chairs to give authors of change 
> proposals for an issue that depends on a newly decided issue time to 
> refactor or withdraw their CP in the face of a WG decision on the 
> earlier decided issue.

I'll prod a little harder here Paul. 

How much time is considered reasonable, especially in light of how much time we've spent discussing these three issues. A week? 10 days? 2 weeks? 

It has been my experience in the past that firm deadlines and milestones have a way of keeping everything moving along at an appropriate pace.
Previously the Chairs have used deadlines
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jun/0315.html) to keep things moving and elicit Change Proposals on a number of Issues, and so it strikes me as not unreasonable to apply a little of the same process again here.
  

> This may mean that we do NOT move directly from one WG decision to an 
> immediate survey on the next issue in the queue.

I hear: there will be "some time" between the first issue and the second, and "some time" likely between the second issue and the third to allow for last minute adjustments. 

That seems reasonable, but again, can we get an idea of quantity of time? A week? 10 days? 2 weeks? It seems all very vague still. 


> 
> In this particular case, the Chairs are trying to determine when we 
> can go to survey for ISSUE-204 which is at the beginning of this set 
> of issues.  See my message:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jul/0089.html
> We are hoping to clarify the status of the two ISSUE-204 change 
> proposals by this Thu so that we could start a straw poll later this 
> week or early next week.  That straw poll would run for approximately 
> one week.

I hear: the Straw Poll for Issue 204 will probably go to survey by no later than Monday or Tuesday next, and reach a deadline for objections in-or-around July 30 or 31, which is 2 weeks from today. 

Would that be a reasonable interpretation? 


> Following the close of the survey for ISSUE-204 the Chairs plan to 
> prioritize very high getting a decision on ISSUE-204 so that we can 
> move on to ISSUE-30 as soon as possible.

Given busy schedules, summer vacations and the fact that Aug. 1 is a holiday in many locations (including Ottawa <grin>), can the Chairs give us a best-guess estimate of how long they envision this high priority decision evaluation for Issue 204 will take? A week? Ten days? Two weeks? Longer?


> BUT depending on the WG
> decision on ISSUE-204 the Chairs may want to give the authors of the
> ISSUE-30 CPs time to change their submissions.

I hear: once Issue 204 is resolved, the Chairs will wait "some more" to see if anyone else changes their mind on their entrenched positions on Issue 30.


Given the fact that we've been beating on this poor horse for over 3 years now, I personally suspect that there will be little movement; further I would suggest to the Chairs that any such movement would take days, not weeks or months, to address.  

Can I ask that you specifically define the appropriate amount of time between the final decision for Issue 204, and the commencement of a Straw Poll on Issue 30? A week? 10 days? 2 weeks?

Knowing this information up-front will also allow others to plan accordingly over the summer months.


> 
> I hope this is clear.  If not I will be glad to answer more questions 
> on this matter.

Thanks Paul, what you provided was indeed clear in terms of process, if a bit incomplete. 

Surely accomplished and experienced Project Managers such as the Chairs understand the value and importance of attaching *specific* timelines to deliverables, and I and many others would appreciate a clear answer to my direct question: 

Can we get some specific deadlines please?

Thanks

JF

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 17:29:05 UTC