- From: Aram Zucker-Scharff via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:49:15 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
@npdoty Addressing the test case situation in particular: I think it is pretty standard process, as I understand it, in the w3c that proposals will often come in having already undergone some level of testing and including at least one test case. My concern here is that we do not want to see proposals that might not have been fully thought out as implementable and be handling a huge number of proposals that there is not even enough of an interest to see a test done around them. I'm open to amending this language in some way, but I have sort of the opposite worry, not that people will think a proposal having a test case is standardized, but that we will end up seeing proposals that are impossible to standardize. I think the danger of some misconception that a proposal is standardized when that's not our intent should be, in part, resolved by the fact that we are a CG and not a WG. Additionally, the folks who don't understand the process well enough to understand how a tested proposal isn't a standard are--I think--equally likely to misconstrue any activity we take on a proposal as some sort of standardization step even when we are just examining or drafting a report on it. So I'm not sure that it not needing tests would be a good defense against that problem. Do you think there might be another way to handle your concern outside of lowering this particular requirement bar? -- GitHub Notification of comment by AramZS Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patcg.github.io/issues/4#issuecomment-1054454226 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 28 February 2022 16:49:17 UTC