Re: CFC: Standing consent to publish working drafts on monthly schedule

Steve,
All of that is expected. If you make a comment we will certainly indicate how it was resolved and point to the specific fix. I’m not sure how the commenting process is at odds with this. There is certainly a possibility that an issue identified in WD#3 might not be addressed before WD#4, but that may be because it is a complex issue that takes more time to address, or because there are more issues than we can address in that particular month, but neither of these should stop our putting out the current version of the editor’s draft for people to check out.

With that in mind, are you not able to live with this proposal?

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk


From: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
Date: Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 11:05
To: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com<mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com>>, Gregg Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>>
Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: RE: CFC: Standing consent to publish working drafts on monthly schedule

I share Greg’s concerns because the current commenting process does not support such a workflow.  Including a change log in the WD is of course a must, but I should also be able to go to GitHub to find which issues were addressed in what WD (e.g. closed and marked with a WD milestone).  We need to be able to open and close finer grained issues on a regular basis to achieve efficiency and clarity of progress.

Steve

From: James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:30 AM
To: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>>
Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>; w3c-waI-gl@w3. org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: CFC: Standing consent to publish working drafts on monthly schedule

I agree Gregg. I do not support this direction.

On Mar 29, 2017, at 23:21, Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>> wrote:
public working draft for comment?
every month?

You will get the same comments over and over.   I would not publish another for comment until you have cleared all the comments from last time.


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

why would we want more comments before we have cleared the ones we have?


Maintaining and editors draft on the WAI/GL site is fine.    But publishing one for comment that has known problems that have not been addressed  - -I don’t see the logic in.  And I see lots of downsides.


Gregg


Gregg C Vanderheiden
greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>



On Mar 29, 2017, at 9:41 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> wrote:

There have been a couple of questions, so we would like to clarify this CFC.

The intent is that the internal editor’s draft will be posted as a Working Draft on the monthly schedule reference below in the original CFC email. The approval is to allow the chairs and Michael to take the current version of the editor’s draft as of a day or two before the publication date and use that to create the Working Draft for comment.

People who follow the group’s work on GitHub can comment anytime, including on the Editor’s draft, but the publication of the Working Draft will show progress and provide a current public version to solicit comments against.

If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce9906bbdf8e544820a4208d4777e4002%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636264831513392427&sdata=CijAN%2FUKesszh3SbVyIXEZKJWiVqAzcqfmz0mTwOXCo%3D&reserved=0>

From: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 12:44
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: CFC: Standing consent to publish working drafts on monthly schedule
Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 12:45

Hi all,

Call For Consensus — ends Thursday March 30th at 1:30pm Boston time.

On the call today we discussed a suggested a monthly publishing schedule for our working draft.
You can review the schedule here. [1]


If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

[1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_timeline<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FWCAG_2.1_timeline&data=02%7C01%7C%7C4486179aa0334ac7644108d475f9ea49%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636263163622050052&sdata=8m7Umr%2BVeVtUq%2F%2FaLbEiBDmho2WSJoxvF9b69iGW7WM%3D&reserved=0>
--
Joshue O Connor
Director | InterAccess.ie<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FInterAccess.ie&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce9906bbdf8e544820a4208d4777e4002%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636264831513392427&sdata=vrd%2Fyh5fwWdgvTCHp7hwuqcn%2F9Srwv6QRJ6uWWWsJ%2Bc%3D&reserved=0>