W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > May 2013

Re: CSS or bust???

From: Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 08:19:57 -0700
To: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
CC: Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CDA67690.7339B%jburdeki@adobe.com>
Hi everyone:

There's a recurring theme here that we should:

* Assess the state of the project and further refining what we deliver for
Beta.
* Make sure we have folks working toward those deliverables.

For assessing the project, all the leads of the project teams need to take
ownership of their project on project.* and make sure it reflects what
needs to be done for beta. Also, we should prioritize tuning the bug genie
to ensure project.* helps us manage and report progress.

For getting people on deliverables, it's great to remind folks of what's
priority. But let's avoid shuffling people around too much. Again: leads
refine what we want to accomplish and estimate the effort for each
project. Then, before we ask people to move from one task to another,
we'll be better able to assess what the sacrifice is and how it will
impact Beta, overall. Let's not get into the cycle of depleting one
project to make us feel better temporarily about another one, when we
probably should be focusing more on recruiting and on-board additional
contributors.

So, leads: get on WPD:Project_Status and the bug genie. And let's not "rob
Peter to pay Paul" if we we haven't even talked with Mary yet. ;-)

Regards.

Julee

----------------------------
julee@adobe.com
@adobejulee





-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 1:37 AM
To: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
Cc: Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org"
<public-webplatform@w3.org>
Subject: Re: CSS or bust???
Resent-From: <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 1:38 AM

>Sounds right on the mark to me, Scott, and thanks to Eliot for originally
>bring this up.
>
>I feel a bit guilty about branching out and starting on the beginner's
>material, but I was just finding it so hard to get my head around
>organizing a group to conquer the CSS properties docs, that the
>beginner's docs felt like a small chunk of content that I could just own
>and bring to fruition easily, for some easy impact to draw more people to
>our site.
>
>But I guess we need reigning in a bit, and being made to align more so we
>can make beta some kind of success. A few questions/points:
>
>1. I did start a list of beta criteria a while ago: I'm assuming this is
>being look at/utilised?
>http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Projects/Beta_Requirements
>2. What happened to the idea of us getting a project manager? Feels like
>we need it really badly.
>3. Did anyone contact any CSS WG types and well-known designers to look
>at some of our more complete CSS property pages and say what they think
>is needed to make them truly good? I was going to do this work, but then
>got busy on a couple of weeks of travelling, and someone said they'd
>start this work off in my absence.
>4. Where are we with dabblet? Can we embed examples yet?
>
>I am happy to start working up some more CSS property pages now, as long
>as I know we are all moving in the same direction.
>
>Chris Mills
>Opera Software, dev.opera.com
>W3C Fellow, web education and webplatform.org
>Author of "Practical CSS3: Develop and Design" (http://goo.gl/AKf9M)
>
>On 30 Apr 2013, at 22:19, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Eliot!
>> 
>> Yes, your concerns are right on the mark, and in the Community
>>Development Task Force meeting today, we considered exactly the same
>>questions. We resolved to provide a clearer definition of our beta
>>criteria, which Doug and Julee began working on. We considered where our
>>resources are currently allocated, we considered new ways to work with
>>and guide our current resources, and we considered avenues for
>>recruiting new resources.
>> 
>> These are in the meeting notes that I'll send around here in a bit.
>> 
>> This is it in a nutshell: beta is a progress report and a call to
>>action for more support. To show progress, we're keen to demonstrate
>>content that is complete and ready to use (CSS properties and HTML5
>>APIs), we'll have established a content architecture, and we'll describe
>>all of the great work that our dedicated volunteers and stewards have
>>performed over the past (now six) months. To call for more support,
>>we'll define "gold standards" for content that is not yet complete and
>>have more cogent processes for contributing (including more interaction
>>with content leaders); we'll also have clearer, more actionable flags
>>and a UI that more successfully guides people to contribute.
>> 
>> So, while alpha was an exploratory phase of WPD, with very little
>>defined in terms of resources, processess, and tools - let alone content
>>and content architecture, beta is the proof of concept and the point
>>where we announce that we are ready to scale our efforts to the wider
>>community.
>> 
>> Such was my interpretation, but I shall defer to my colleagues. Doug,
>>Julee, et al.: have I got this right?
>> 
>> ~Scott
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Eliot Graff
>><Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Hi All.
>> 
>> [[Before I ask these questions, I want to say that I am as guilty of
>>contributing to this as anyone, having recently introduced the 400+
>>JavaScript pages in to the mix.]]
>> 
>> Are we really placing our energies in the right places? Are we working
>>on the right things? Or are we losing focus?
>> 
>> I thoroughly understand that there are a _many_ important and wonderful
>>aspects of WPD that we could be creating, enhancing, and building, but I
>>think we may be drifting from our original decisions (and if not, this
>>will serve as a verification of our course of action). I was under the
>>impression that we determined that we would identify and work on one
>>section of WPD at a time to get that area up to what we considered "beta
>>content", and that we were going to do that starting with the CSS
>>properties. We're not anywhere near complete on those, are we? If we
>>are, I apologize, and carry on. But I look at the CSS Properties
>>spreadsheet [1] and I see a ton of work left to go. Yet, over the past
>>couple of weeks, we are all (myself included) very eager to start work
>>on JavaScript reference, Beginner's Guide, DOM, and other large projects
>>(I'm sorry to pick on these in particular).
>> 
>> My call to this community is this: We should validate that our
>>priorities are sound (from time to time) and strive to stay focused on
>>our highest priority items prior to embarking on new work. In short, we
>>need to hold ourselves accountable to our goals. Certainly, this is true
>>while our community is still small but growing. Maybe later, when we're
>>a robust and enormous group, we can have the luxury of being less
>>strident.
>> 
>> Can we reiterate (in mail or during upcoming telcons) what our
>>priorities are currently, and make sure that we're staffed to accomplish
>>them in a timely manner?
>> 
>> I welcome discussion about this. My main goal is to help us get to beta
>>as soon as possible under our chosen criteria.
>> 
>> Most sincerely,
>> 
>> Eliot
>> 
>> [1] 
>>https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkRs-89PKiZpdE0xdm9Sb1ZvRW1Z
>>RzMtWEdyU0Z4OEE#gid=14
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2013 15:20:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:48 UTC