Re: Comment tracking for navigation-timing CR [Was: Re: publishing new WD of URL spec]

On 9/12/2014 8:27 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 9/12/14, 5:27 AM, Stephen Zilles wrote:
>> Is it this last piece that you find overly burdensome?
> _I_ am not finding anything overly burdensome personally, because I am 
> not myself trying to issue errata.
> I am trying to get working groups to issue errata, and my observation 
> is that they generally push back on this pretty strenuously.  My 
> conclusion is that they perceive some part of the errata-issuing 
> process to be overly burdensome.  You'd have to ask them what exactly 
> the burdensome part is and how to make it less burdensome.
> If you want me to speculate past what I can actually observe, I 
> believe it's simply a matter of priorities and incentives.  Making 
> sure errata happen expeditiously is a top priority for WHATWG specs 
> (in fact a basic premise of the whole "living specification" setup), 
> but a complete non-priority for W3C ones.  As far as I can tell, there 
> are no incentives inside the W3C process or organization for actually 
> issuing errata, so it's just perceived as extra work for no benefit.

Thanks Boris.  So the process issue that we should work on is:

How to motivate the W3C Community and WGs to expeditiously and 
consistently issue errata?  Correct?

> -Boris

Received on Friday, 12 September 2014 12:48:46 UTC