> Alastair Campbell <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com> > 30 March 2017 at 10:08 > > Gregg wrote: > > > To keep publishing new versions when the comments have not been > cleared from the last is not good practice and not considerate of > reviewers. > > > I do not understand the rationale > > IMO: to enable some parallel working. > > For example, the next version could add one or more SCs, which would > be fresh for reviewers. > > It does require careful highlighting of what is changed in each > version, and the status of comments should be apparent (i.e. in the > github issue, say when it has been addressed). > Thanks Alastair - yes, this model is more in line with more iterative specs and allows us to progress (and monitor progress) in a more timely manner. > > Personally, I advocated a publish-all then whittle down approach [1], > but no one else commented on that. > There were pros and cons to that, so on reflection we decided the current model would be preferable (with its own inherent pros/cons also!). Thanks Josh > > Cheers, > > -Alastair > > 1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017JanMar/0043.html > -- Joshue O Connor Director | InterAccess.ie
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2017 09:14:58 UTC