RE: Announcing FPWD pubs on p-review-announce [Was: Re: Comments on: W3C Process2015]

[This is in response to:
   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2015Apr/0023.html
... quoted below. It should be threaded in the mail archive and your MUA.]

Hello all,

I heard there were discussions on this list about making use of  
public-review-announce which match my team's interests in looking at how  
to publicise work, encourage wide-review etc.

So, I just joined the CG and will now receive e-mail directly.

Who in this group, or on this list, would be the most knowledgeable  
person(s) I could talk to and would be willing to talk to me and brief me  
on the key aspects?

Thank you.
Coralie Mercier, Acting Head of W3C Marketing & Communications


========
The list exists,
Public-review-announce@w3.org
As noted it is little used, but this may be due to it being entirely  
invisible. It took me over an hour to find it and that I could only do by  
tracing back the message history when it was being developed. It is not at  
all visible on the W3 home page nor does it seem to appear under the  
"participation" links. It is not even mentioned under Specification Review  
(http://www.w3.org/participate/review#specs ).

In the discussion that led to the list's creation, it was noted that it  
should not be totally automatic because the goal was for a Working Group  
to identify important drafts on which they wanted comments as distinct  
 from drafts that are recording run of the mill decisions. I would also  
note that Process 2014 has far fewer Maturity level transitions for which  
Review makes sense. There is only Working Draft and Candidate  
Recommendation. There is no LC and CR is too late so that leaves only WD  
and, as noted above, with the exception of FPWD, subsequent WDs should not  
automatically be put on the list or list will be flooded. I agree that  
automatic is good, but perhaps making it the automation be part of the new  
WD publishing system, check a box and add a comment, would suffice in the  
automation area.

Steve Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)
> [mailto:Michael.Champion@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 3:38 PM
> To: David Singer
> Cc: chaals@yandex-team.ru; Arthur Barstow; Phillips, Addison; public-
> w3process@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Announcing FPWD pubs on p-review-announce [Was: Re:
> Comments on: W3C Process2015]
>Agree, I would rather rely on automation than process.  Maybe the PD  
> should
> just say that the team setup and maintain an automated mechanism to  
> inform
> people of FPWD LCWD Transition requests/Transitions Exclusion
> opportunities
>... in  channel that doesn't have anything else on it.
>-----Original Message-----
> From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2015 3:33 PM
> To: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)
> Cc: chaals@yandex-team.ru; Arthur Barstow; Phillips, Addison; public-
> w3process@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Announcing FPWD pubs on p-review-announce [Was: Re:
> Comments on: W3C Process2015]
>> On Apr 6, 2015, at 15:24 , Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)
> <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I believe there is one.  Trouble is few use it.
>has to be automatic for all the obvious events
>FPWD
> LCWD
> Transition requests/Transitions
> Exclusion opportunities
> Incoming liaisons, maybe
>> Does the Process Doc have to mandate it as the mechanism to inform the
> world of the desire of a WG for wide review?
>I would hate to mandate it.  But making it an easy tool is good.
>If we do the auto stuff and allow chairs/team to add, then everyone would
> subscribe.
>If all emails indicate the end-date of the request, we could even have a  
> living
> page of current requests.
>Document:  Title + URL
> Event:  (LCWD, FPWD, Review request…)
> End-date:  XX-XX-XX
> Source: (the WG)
>…
>>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com]
> > Sent: Monday, April 6, 2015 3:15 PM
> > To: chaals@yandex-team.ru
> > Cc: Arthur Barstow; Phillips, Addison; public-w3process@w3.org;
> > public-i18n-core@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Announcing FPWD pubs on p-review-announce [Was: Re:
> > Comments on: W3C Process2015]
> >
> > we desperately need a “this is a good time to review” list (‘life
> > events’ list, transitions, excl. opps, reviews opps., etc.)
> >
> >> On Apr 6, 2015, at 13:58 , chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll be forwarding this to the people who actually do things like
> >> this, in the hopes that helps. It would be really useful…
> >>
> >> cheers
> >>
> >> 06.04.2015, 22:55, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@gmail.com>:
> >>> On 4/6/15 4:04 PM, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> >>>> I agree with Chaals that FPWD is a good time to start the review  
> process.
> >>>
> >>> Me three and to facilitate the FPWD discovery part, several months
> >>> ago
> >>> ([ab]) I proposed the Pub Team `automagically` announce FPWD
> >>> publications on [p-r-a] but that has never been done :-(.
> >>>
> >>> -AB
> >>>
> >>> [ab]
> >>> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Nov/0065.
> >>> h
> >>> tml> [p-r-a]
> >>> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-announce/>
========

-- 
  Coralie Mercier  -  W3C Communications Team  -  http://www.w3.org
mailto:coralie@w3.org +336 4322 0001 http://www.w3.org/People/CMercier/

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2015 07:35:09 UTC