- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:28:07 +0100
- To: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: "OWL Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, Héctor Pérez-Urbina <Hector.Perez-Urbina@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A07517E8@judith.fzi.de>
Hi Alan!
>You did the correct thing. It was my mistake to miss the issue.
>Apologies again,
>Alan
Disagreed! Tracker is the culprit! :)
A proposal to change the behaviour of Tracker:
* When raising an issue, the initial state should be "raised", not "open".
* Perhaps, instead of different tables for "raised" and "open", there
should be only one for both states (actually: every state different from
"closed"). One can easily distinguish between the "degree of openness" by
the "State" flag in the table.
* similar for the actions: currently, there are distinct tables for "open"
and "pending review" tables. I do not regard this to be useful.
* The "Issues" Wiki page also talks about an "owner" of an issue:
"Each open issue will be assigned an "owner" whose responsibility
it is to initiate/lead a discussion, the objective of which is to
bring to the WG a proposal to close the issue as RESOLVED, POSTPONED
or REJECTED; the owner will normally be the same person who raised
the issue."
So normally, the owner is the raiser, but for the non-normal cases, what
is still missing is a specific "owner" entry for each issue.
Cheers,
Michael
>
>On Mar 6, 2008, at 6:55 AM, Michael Schneider wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> In yesterday's telco we overlooked the new issue 96, since it
>> hasn't been in
>> tracker's "open" section, but in the "raised" section.
>>
>> When I raised this issue, I remembered the following policy:
>>
>> <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Issues>
>>
>> "When creating new issue, it should initially be assigned
>> the state "Raised" (rather than "Open")"
>>
>> However, tracker didn't follow this policy, but marked my new issue
>> to be
>> "open" first. So I edited the issue to mark it as
>"raised"... with the
>> result that it effectively became invisible. :-]
>>
>> How to proceed? I can, of course, go an "re-open" my issue. But we
>> should
>> think about either changing the policy, or tracker's way to
>handle new
>> issues.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2008 16:28:23 UTC