RE: process question and query about ISSUE-88

> 10808, 10823, 10828
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10808

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10823

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10828


Note that these were originally pre-Last Call bugs since they were filed before Oct 1, 2010.  Any disagreement with the Editor over the resolution of these bugs will require that the bugs be escalated as Last Call issues since the last date for creating pre-Last Call issues was Jan 22 [1].

>11734 and 11829
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11734

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11829


These are Last Call bugs since they were file after Oct 1, 2010.  If you cannot find an amicable resolution of these bugs you can escalate them to be Last Call issues.

/paulc

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html

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

From: Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin [mailto:aharon@google.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 11:57 AM
To: Phillips, Addison
Cc: Paul Cotton; Richard Ishida; public-i18n-core@w3.org; Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net); Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com); Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org)
Subject: Re: process question and query about ISSUE-88

FYI, over the last couple of days, Ian has made progress on 3 (10823, 10828, 11734) out of the 5 bugs that still require action. (It's no my turn on them, but I am having trouble seeing the change he made in the HTML5 spec.) So, I am relieved to say that the door does not seem to be closed yet, and I do think that we should be able to come to an amicable resolution with the editor. Of course, I am still hoping to hear from him re the other two issues (10808 and 11829).

Thanks,
Aharon
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com<mailto:addison@lab126.com>> wrote:
I'm happy to have a phone call: we really need to understand this so we can work effectively with you. We're generally pleased with the process so far, but, although you sentences are simple and declarative, I don't feel I know if we should be escalating issues into Issues or not.

Is there a convenient time for us to chat?

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect (Lab126)
Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Cotton [mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com<mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 8:05 AM
> To: Richard Ishida; Phillips, Addison
> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org<mailto:public-i18n-core@w3.org>; Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>);
> Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>); Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org<mailto:mike@w3.org>)
> Subject: RE: process question and query about ISSUE-88
>
> One further thought, if you think a phone call would help to
> explain the HTML WG processes please just let me know.
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596<tel:%28425%29%20705-9596> Fax: (425) 936-7329<tel:%28425%29%20936-7329>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Cotton
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 9:33 AM
> To: 'Richard Ishida'; Phillips, Addison
> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org<mailto:public-i18n-core@w3.org>; Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>);
> Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>); Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org<mailto:mike@w3.org>)
> Subject: RE: process question and query about ISSUE-88
>
> > Aharon didn't really understood what he had to do here, and
> Addison and I weren't able to understand it either.
>
> The HTML WG Chairs sent the following email on Sep 7, 2010 that
> outlined a plan for how the WG was going to get to Last Call:
>
> Timeline to Last Call
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0074.html

>
> > Reminder: - Jan 22, 2010 is the cutoff for escalating bugs for
> pre-LC consideration - all issues in tracker, calls for proposal
> issued by this date.
> >Consequences of missing this date: any further escalations will be
> treated as a Last Call comment.
>
> If you review the message above it explains in detail what Sam was
> trying to explain.  Basically in your case if you disagreed with
> the disposition of any of your bugs that were filed before Oct 1,
> you had until Jan 22 to request that they be escalated into WG
> Tracker issues.
>
> Please let me know if you understand the situations after reviewing
> the above message and this email.
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596<tel:%28425%29%20705-9596> Fax: (425) 936-7329<tel:%28425%29%20936-7329>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Ishida [mailto:ishida@w3.org<mailto:ishida@w3.org>]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 3:36 AM
> To: Phillips, Addison
> Cc: Paul Cotton; public-i18n-core@w3.org<mailto:public-i18n-core@w3.org>; Sam Ruby
> (rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>); Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>);
> Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org<mailto:mike@w3.org>)
> Subject: Re: process question and query about ISSUE-88
>
> I think one specific question was, what does this mean:
>
> "--- Comment #57 from Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> 2011-01-17
> 21:54:41 UTC ---
> Reminder: - Jan 22, 2010 is the cutoff for escalating bugs for pre-
> LC consideration - all issues in tracker, calls for proposal issued
> by this date.
> Consequences of missing this date: any further escalations will be
> treated as a Last Call comment.
> "
>
> Aharon didn't really understood what he had to do here, and Addison
> and I weren't able to understand it either.
>
> RI
>
> Richard Ishida
> Internationalization Activity Lead
> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>
> http://www.w3.org/International/

> http://rishida.net/

>
> On 10/02/2011 06:11, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> > Hello Paul,
> >
> > Thanks for the response. Our list of re-opened bugs is scattered
> across a couple of teleconferences. We'll pull the list together
> for you. It isn't a long list.
> >
> > I am not sure that our intention was to escalate them to WG
> issues, at least, not in all cases. Our goal was to decide whether
> your WG's or editor's proposed resolution satisfied us. I'm not
> sure that any issues require resolution before LC, assuming that LC
> issues will be dealt with on an equal footing. Nonetheless, I will
> check with the WG membership before committing to any particular
> resolution.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Addison
> >
> > Addison Phillips
> > Globalization Architect (Lab126)
> > Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)
> >
> > Internationalization is not a feature.
> > It is an architecture.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Paul Cotton [mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com<mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 8:53 PM
> >> To: Phillips, Addison
> >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org<mailto:public-i18n-core@w3.org>; Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>);
> >> Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>); Michael(tm) Smith
> (mike@w3.org<mailto:mike@w3.org>)
> >> Subject: RE: process question and query about ISSUE-88
> >>
> >>> Recently (a few weeks ago, actually), our WG reopened a few
> bugs
> >> filed before your cutoff date. We would like to know how these
> will
> >> be handled, etc. That is: what is your process for clearing our
> open
> >> bugs?
> >>
> >> Can you help us here by explicitly listing the bugs you re-
> opened?
> >>
> >> Please note that the Jan 22 deadline was for the escalation of
> bugs
> >> into WG issues.  See:
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-

> html/2010Sep/0074.html
> >>
> >>> - Jan 22, 2010 - cutoff for escalating bugs for pre-LC
> >> consideration - all issues in tracker, calls for proposal issued
> by
> >> this date
> >>> Consequences of missing this date: any further escalations will
> >> be treated as a Last Call comment.
> >>
> >> Was your intent to convert the re-opened bugs in WG Issues to
> ensure
> >> they were handled before Last Call?
> >>
> >> /paulc
> >>
> >> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> >> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> >> Tel: (425) 705-9596<tel:%28425%29%20705-9596> Fax: (425) 936-7329<tel:%28425%29%20936-7329>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Phillips, Addison [mailto:addison@lab126.com<mailto:addison@lab126.com>]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 11:48 AM
> >> To: Paul Cotton; Sam Ruby (rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>); Maciej
> Stachowiak
> >> (mjs@apple.com<mailto:mjs@apple.com>); Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org<mailto:mike@w3.org>)
> >> Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org<mailto:public-i18n-core@w3.org>
> >> Subject: process question and query about ISSUE-88
> >>
> >> Dear HTML5 WG chairs,
> >>
> >> I have been tasked [1][2] by the Internationalization WG with
> >> touching base with you about two topics.
> >>
> >> 1. Recently (a few weeks ago, actually), our WG reopened a few
> bugs
> >> filed before your cutoff date. We would like to know how these
> will
> >> be handled, etc. That is: what is your process for clearing our
> open
> >> bugs?
> >>
> >> 2. We noticed also that ISSUE-88 seems to have gone dormant and
> are
> >> wondering about the status of this issue. There is no recent
> update
> >> on http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html. Is any
> progress
> >> being made there.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Addison
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/16 ACTION-16
> [2]
> >> http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/19 ACTION-19
> >>
> >> Addison Phillips
> >> Globalization Architect (Lab126)
> >> Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)
> >>
> >> Internationalization is not a feature.
> >> It is an architecture.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >