W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html

From: Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:50:40 -0700
Message-ID: <539F4A90.40804@linux.intel.com>
To: public-w3process@w3.org

On 2014-06-16 11:09, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 6/16/14 1:30 PM, Wayne Carr wrote:
>> I assume you are referring to comments that came in as part of the AC 
>> review. 
> Yes.
>> Those comments appear to me largely editorial and so can be fixed as 
>> part of the usual process of considering the AC review and not hold 
>> up approval. 
> Well perhaps so but my understanding is there was agreement this list 
> would be used for tasks such as comment processing. As such, my 
> expectation is the group will review the comments.

I'd think with those comments that anything new that would actually 
change the process (e.g. wanting some other old text in the process 
changed that we hadn't been looking at) would likely turn into an issue 
for this group to look at for the next revision.  But, for something 
that's clearly an editorial clarification (a sentence could be worded 
better), I don't think we should keep on iterating through this long 
process.  i.e. not go back to this list for minor wording review, then 
do another last call review, then do another long AC review.   That 
would be months down the road until we're back where we are now.

I like the chapter 7 revisions, very much like that it was done largely 
in this CG - but this is at a stage where the AC wouldn't be reviewing 
the comments for editorial changes either -- it would be part of the 
Director's decision on consensus based on the AC review.  The AC could 
then appeal the decision if it objected.   I think we should finish this 
up - and not have it drag on - and start a new round of revisions.

> -AB
Received on Monday, 16 June 2014 19:51:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:19 UTC