- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 18:30:53 +0100
- To: Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com>
- Cc: public-xslt-40@w3.org, Matthew Patterson <matt@saxonica.com>
> > We’ll plan to do an issue-focused meeting on 27 June. Suggestions for > issues that would benefit from discussion most welcome. > I think we've learned that it's easy to spend an hour talking about one issue; and that the conversation is most likely to be productive if there is a very concrete proposal on the table. There are two kinds of concrete proposal: a draft specification (PR) that we can review, or a proposal to drop an idea and not pursue it further. We can measure progress by the number of issues we close, and to do that I think we need to start identifying things that we need to drop. I suggest that other people review the list of open issues, and if you find one that you personally think is unlikely to lead to a successful proposal, either because it's a bad idea or because it's too disruptive or too controversial or too vague, then tag it as a proposed "close with no action", and those should go on our agenda. We should keep things open only if (a) there is a general feeling in the group that it's a worthwhile idea, and (b) someone is prepared to volunteer to do the work: it needs positive enthusiasm to make the cut. There's a set of issues seeking WG approval for things that I put in the draft spec but which ought to be reviewed in the same way as we review a PR. Again, these count as concrete proposals. Some of them I think are widely accepted, some we have hardly looked at and probably don't stand the test of time. I think it falls on me to identify these and propose what we should do about them: I'll try and put a list together. Mike
Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2023 17:31:01 UTC