W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-secondscreen@w3.org > November 2014

[Second Screen] Off Topic (was RE: Issue priorities)

From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:22:00 -0800
To: "'Kostiainen, Anssi'" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>, "'Rottsches, Dominik'" <dominik.rottsches@intel.com>, <public-secondscreen@w3.org>, <public-webscreens@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000d01d005a7$475403b0$d5fc0b10$@ca>
Hi All,

Allow me to very briefly introduce myself. My name is John Foliot, and I am
a web accessibility specialist. I spend a fair bit of my volunteer time at
the W3C, and related to "media / video", I was one of the authors of the
Media Accessibility User Requirements -
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/media-a11y-reqs/. I follow this list mostly out of
interest, and to "keep an eye on" developments as they evolve.

I am writing this group today to make a small but important request. Could I
ask that when posting to either of these lists, that the subject line
clearly indicate the list target? (For example, you will note I added
[Second Screen], which is a frequently used convention). As personally I
manage multiple W3C mailing lists in my inbox, this would make it extremely
simple to do: conversely an email with the subject line "Issue Priorities"
is, uhm, relatively vague when taken out of context.

At any rate, this is just a suggestion, and requires that the group make an
effort to do this. If you all deem it too much, that's fine, but I wrote to
ask you to consider it, and I will thank you for taking the time to do just
that :-)


John Foliot
Web Accessibility Specialist
W3C Invited Expert - Accessibility
Co-Founder, Open Web Camp

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kostiainen, Anssi [mailto:anssi.kostiainen@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 4:41 AM
> To: Rottsches, Dominik; public-secondscreen@w3.org; public-
> webscreens@w3.org
> Subject: Issue priorities
> Hi All,
> Since we start to have a good list of issues [1], I'd ask the editor,
> with the help of the group, to take a first stab at assigning
> priorities to the issues. GH makes the priority setting easy using
> labels. To keep this simple, we could use:
> P1 = High
> P2 = Med
> P3 = Low
> I suggest the primary responsibility is on the editor to ensure the
> issue priorities reflect the group's consensus.
> To give more context, other labels (bug, duplicate, enhancement etc.)
> could be used in addition to P{1,2,3}.
> [Later on, we can create milestones that map to the standards track
> stages (First Public Working Draft, Last Call, Candidate Rec etc., see
> [2]) and associate the issues with the milestones.]
> I think this would help not only the group's current participants, but
> also new people who are still joining the group, to have a shared
> understanding of the priorities.
> I've documented this proposal in the Work Mode wiki at [3].
> All - comments and suggestions welcome.
> Thanks,
> -Anssi
> [1] https://github.com/w3c/presentation-api/issues
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#recs-and-notes
> [3] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Second_Screen/Work_Mode
Received on Friday, 21 November 2014 16:22:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:18:43 UTC