- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:33:36 +0200
- To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>, "Stephen Zilles" <szilles@adobe.com>
On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 07:13:25 +0200, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com> wrote: > Charles, > A couple of small points. Note that unless someone screams, these will all appear in the next editor's draft, sometime this week. > 1. Implementation Experience. > You added, " As creating, reviewing, and running tests can be very > time-consuming, Working Groups are often able to work more effectively > if they plan their test development work early in the development > process." > > We have long held that tests are not necessarily required and that the > criteria is demonstration of (interoperable) implementations. For this, > tests are one way to go, but not necessarily the only way. So I suggest > that you change your sentence to, " Planning and accomplishing a > demonstration of (interoperable) implementations can be very time > consuming. Groups are often able to work more effectively if they plan > how they will demonstrate interoperable implementations early in the > development process; for example, they may wish to develop tests in > concert with implementation efforts." Sure. (Since I don't think that sentence matters, it would be silly to suggest I care that what is in it matters :) ). > 2. In bullet 3 of 7.2, the word "change" should occur after > "substantive" in the first sentence. Yep. > 3. I am a bit confused about the subsection of 7.4.5 on "edited > Recommendations". This section list as a "SHOULD" that the Working > Group, " SHOULD document known implementation.", but this is one of the > General Requirements of 7.2. Does this mean that the General > Requirements do not apply or should this requirement be removed in favor > of the General Requirements (which seem to be required for "all W3C > Recommendations" per the next paragraph. It should be removed - it's just an editorial error. Thanks for catching it. cheers Chaals > Steve Z. > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:24 PM > To: public-w3process@w3.org > Subject: New Editor's draft of Chapter 7 > > Hi folks, as always the latest draft is at > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/default/tr.html > > Changes: > - email thread starting at > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2013Sep/0018.html> > editorial stuff > - clarified up requirements for an Edited Recommendation > - simplified errata, so making normative changes doesn't have a possible > parallel process any more. > - added a sentence to the implementation experience section, advising > people to plan early. > > There are currently 7 issues pending review > <https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/pendingreview> (i.e. > I believe the draft addresses them) and none which have not been > addressed. > > cheers > > Chaals > > -- > Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex > chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com > -- Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 14:34:10 UTC