W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > July to September 2021

Re: Templates for Process 2021 documents

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 20:35:00 -0700
To: spec-prod@w3.org, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Denis Ah-Kang <denis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <a4a76d22-4964-0b62-8156-1b96e3387eda@inkedblade.net>
On 8/17/21 2:11 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> All,
> I've been working on the templates for the upcoming new Process 2021.
> Process 2021 is currently sitting at:
>   https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/snapshots/2021-07-16
> (scheduled to be adopted in mid-September)
> You can see the work in progress at:
>    https://w3c.github.io/tr-design/p2021mockup/
> We're still looking at them so things are subject to change.
> You'll notice that those draws on previous ideas.
> I welcome feedback here.


* The "details about this document" section should stay uncollapsed by 
default, since people new to our specs aren't aware that we do things like 
have dated URLs and link to places for feedback. (I would love to have all 
this compacted, but that's going to require some actual design skills. In the 
meantime, let's not hide important information.) If we want a JS-supported 
setting that tracks whether your latest preference was open or closed, and 
sets it accordingly onload, though, that would be fine.
See https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/145

* As I mentioned earlier, pulling out the Group(s) info from SOTD into the 
header would be much better just tweaking the wording of the sentence within 
SOTD. “This document was published by the Web Performance Working Group as a 
Candidate Recommendation Snapshot using the Recommendation track” would then 
be redundant with info in the header and can be deleted.

* I'd love it if we could pull the process and legal stuff into its own 
section so it's not mixed up in SOTD. https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/221

* I still believe strongly that “A list of current W3C publications and the 
latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical 
reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/” should die.

* I really like that you're linking the status at the top to an explanation of 
what that status means. But it should go someplace more specific than the top 
of the document. Please include an anchor to the status abbreviation, and put 
anchors for each of those abbreviations in the header of whatever section is 
the best one to land one.

E.g. CRD would go to https://www.w3.org/standards/types#CRD
and https://www.w3.org/standards/types#x2-3-candidate-recommendation would 
include an <span id="CRD"></span> or something, so that when we reorganize the 
document we can move the anchor appropriately.

* Commit History doesn't go under "Feedback", it goes under "History".

* "Pull requests" doesn't need to be there. You're already linking to the GH 
repo/issues list, people who know how to do pull requests will find it easily. 
(And pull requests are usually not the best way for a newbie to send feedback, 
it's better to post an issue to discuss first.)

Thanks for your work on this~

Received on Friday, 10 September 2021 03:35:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 10 September 2021 03:35:27 UTC