Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Rethink the TAG's review intake process. (PR #1102)

@msporny commented on this pull request.



> +
+  - type: input
+    attributes:
+      label: Specification
+      placeholder: Enter a URL.
+      value: "https://"
+    validations:
+      required: true
+
+  - type: textarea
+    attributes:
+      label: Other documents
+      description: List any other documents that are relevant to our review.
+      value: |
+        - A description of what has changed since our previous review: <!-- URL -->
+        - Explainer(s) for specifically the changed features: <!-- Based on https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/. If sections of that have moved to the specification, link directly to those sections or risk getting feedback on the whole spec. -->

This feels a bit heavyweight -- can we replace this with a list of issues/PRs that have been processed along with the class of change they make to the spec. We could also include a summary of what has changed. The reasoning here is that revisions to specifications are often in response to issues raised and those issues typically contain the details of why the change was made. I get that it would be nice for the TAG and other groups to have a summary of changes, and so maybe a paragraph or four would be fine in that case... but having to write an entire explainer to just cover a handful of issues in a maintenance release seems a bit much.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/pull/1102#pullrequestreview-2874802197
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/pull/1102/review/2874802197@github.com>