Re: DOM LS review

> On Dec 12, 2019, at 1:31, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Léonie. That's a really helpful description.
> 
> Hmm... If the horizontal review happens *after* the snapshot, it will, by design, produce a conflict any time an issue is uncovered. Wouldn't it make more sense to do the horizontal review before the snapshot is taken and resolve (or defer) any issues at that point?

The way I see it, Horizontal Review should happen continuously (which means at your convenience, not that you're supposed to continuously reread DOM and HTML 27/7:), and therefore before the snapshot. When a snapshot is made and proposed for CR, it is mainly a time to check that any comment that was made and needed to be addressed was indeed addressed. Of course, that can also be an opportunity to notice problems we had missed before.

Maybe it could be helpful, given that these snapshots are on a schedule, for the chairs of the WG to send a reminder to review maybe a month and a half or so *before* the snapshot, for the sake of people and groups who haven't reviewed it.

But the main point of the snapshot itself should not be to trigger the start of reviews, it should be a sanity check verifying that what should have happened during this revision cycle did in fact happen.

If we do find new blocking problems, or observe that blocking problems previously raised were not addressed to satisfaction, we should then:
1. Work with the WHATWG on these issues to make sure they do get resolved and that future snapshots do get the fixes
2. Decide whether these issues are sufficiently severe that they warrant rejecting the this snapshot as CR (and therefore REC), and waiting for the next one.

My reading of the issues you've been talking about leads me to think that there is indeed work to be done with the Editors of DOM and HTML to address the issues to satisfaction, but that they are not so severe as to justify rejecting this Snapshot.

—Florian