W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: Co-ordinating feedback

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 09:40:31 +0000
To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
CC: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <80AFB6CB-A480-4B7B-8544-36370A7C8326@nomensa.com>
> Could you set this up in a wiki or some other highly accessible application that will at least generate proper HTML table markup?

Hi Jason,

Sure, it was the concept rather than format I was worried about. The only thing is that wiki format for tables is really delicate, so having lots of people edit the same page could lead to some terrible markup!

Before launching in on this (and having had sleep now), perhaps I should give github a chance? (Nudging Michael, who thought we might be able enabled editing of the issue by the assignee.)

The concept was to make sure some people were looking at each SC, draw a line under a round of reviews, and have a new round with refined SCs.

In github terms I think that would mean:

-          Setup a milestone (perhaps “Review round 1” or similar), set all current issues to that milestone;

-          Direct people to review SCs with the least comments [1];

-          If reviewers are happy with the SC (or a revised version in the comments), they add a positive comment to say so.

-          If reviewers think there are issues, add comments about that.

-          The SC manager can rebut the comments or refine the SC in the comments.

-          SCs which need discussion are raised as agenda items for the weekly call. (E.g. I would raise the contrast one for next week, as there is a critical concept that needs to be accepted for it to work.)

-          Once every SC has comments or thumbs up from (say) 5 people, we start a new milestone.

I’m not sure if it would be best to setup new issues for each SC and close the old one, or transfer them across milestones? I suspect it would be best to start a new issue for the SC, and link back to the previous one at the top for historical discussion, but we could probably do either on a case by case basis depending on how different the SC is at the end of the round.

It is also possible to construct searches such as: every SC I haven’t commented on, which will help spread it around.

My github-foo is not strong, especially around how milestones work, so this is only an idea. Does it seem reasonable?



1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acomments-asc

2] Everything I haven’t commented on is: “is:issue is:open -commenter:alastc”
Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2016 09:41:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:07 UTC