Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Refinements to early design review (PR #988)

@jyasskin approved this pull request.

A couple suggestions, but this looks great even if you decide not to take them.

>    - The group where the work on this specification is currently being done:
-  - The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if current group is a community group or other incubation venue):
+  - The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done:

I think we should keep the note that this won't always be needed. Perhaps:
```suggestion
  - The group where standardization of this work is intended to be done (if different from the current group):
```

>  
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 CAREFULLY READ AND DELETE CONTENT BELOW THIS LINE BEFORE SUBMITTING
 
 Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting.
 
-In particular:
-* if anything links to a URL which requires authentication (e.g. Google document), please make sure anyone with the link can access the document. We would prefer public documents though, since we work in the open.
+Use links to content rather than pasting text into this issue.  Issues are ephemeral and most of the material we are asking for has long term value.

I feel like the paragraph before this and the paragraph after should be next to each other. Maybe this one belongs first?

>  
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 CAREFULLY READ AND DELETE CONTENT BELOW THIS LINE BEFORE SUBMITTING
 
 Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting.
 
+Use links to content rather than pasting text into this issue.  Issues are ephemeral and most of the material we are asking for has long term value.

I feel like the paragraph before this and the paragraph after should be next to each other. Maybe this one belongs first?

>  
 ² A Security and Privacy questionnaire helps us understand potential security and privacy issues and mitigations for your design, and can save us asking redundant questions. See https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/.
 
-³ For your own organization, you can simply state the organization's position instead of linking to it. Chromium doesn't have a standards-positions repository and [prefers](https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:docs/standards/positions/GoogleChrome/README.md) to use comments from the teams that maintain the relevant area of their codebase.
+³ For your own organization, you can simply state the organization's position instead of linking to it.  This includes items on [Mozilla standards-positions](https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions), and [WebKit standards-positions](https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions).  Chromium doesn't have a standards-positions repository and [prefers](https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:docs/standards/positions/GoogleChrome/README.md) to use comments from the teams that maintain the relevant area of their codebase.
+
+⁴ Include a link to [Chrome Status](https://chromestatus.com/), [Mozilla's](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/), [WebKit's Bugzilla](https://bugs.webkit.org/), or trackers for other implementations if those are known to you.

```suggestion
⁴ Include links to [Chrome Status](https://chromestatus.com/), [Mozilla's](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/), [WebKit's Bugzilla](https://bugs.webkit.org/), and/or trackers for other implementations if those are known to you.
```

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/pull/988#pullrequestreview-2283468526
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/pull/988/review/2283468526@github.com>