- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:53:42 +0000
- To: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- CC: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>, "public-vision-newstd@w3.org" <public-vision-newstd@w3.org>
>1. Implementers who are directly active and working on the specification usually give feedback during the WD phase. "Usually" is a very important word in this generalization. Actually this was not true for the very large XQuery family of specs. The database software companies represented on the XQuery WG did not want to review the spec in detail during the WD stage and I had to declare a "first" Last Call in order to get them to review the spec. That generated 1200 LC comments many of which came from WG participants which at that time was a record number of LC comments except for the W3C IPR Policy. This large number of LC comments forced us to lower the bar for processing the LC comments that came from WG members. We tried to treat external LC comments as outlined in the W3C Process document. /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 -----Original Message----- From: public-vision-newstd-request@w3.org [mailto:public-vision-newstd-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Karl Dubost Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 9:35 AM To: Robin Berjon Cc: Arnaud Le Hors; public-vision-newstd@w3.org Subject: LC comments accountability Re: Ideas on simplification of process and operations A few ideas around LC comments, DDoS and their accountability Le 7 juil. 2010 à 06:15, Robin Berjon a écrit : > LC can be gruelling when you're faced with a comment DDoS, but on the other hand if we don't have LC we don't get (all) comments. My experience from handling LC, attending transition calls and discussing with people, in a ironic way, the LC DDoS is the result of the process itself. :) 1. Implementers who are directly active and working on the specification usually give feedback during the WD phase. 2. People who feel that they will not be heard, or are more distant with the specification (in terms of interests to actually implement it) wait for the Last Call to be sure that their comments will be taken into account. Possible ideas for solving the issues (with their own drawbacks): * A Working Group where implementers have strong impacts in what goes into the specification and recognized as such in the charter and decision process. * Raising the comments accountability (timeframe for answering, acknowledging the comment, etc) during WD phase. * Social mechanisms to encourage positive participation (right to comment depending on your involvement ala StackOverflow) -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 01:54:22 UTC