Re: Process Enforcement Re: XHTML 2.0 and Semantics

At 9:28 -0700 2003-01-15, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Karl Dubost wrote:
>
>  > But there's an interesting comment here. How to ensure that all the
>>  public comments are taken into account
>
>The solution already exists. It is called a "bug database" or "problem
>report database" and can be implemented using free software like
>bugzilla (http://bugzilla.org/). The system can be setup so that
>anybody can submit a comment/bug/report and then see how WG reacts to
>it. A WG does not have to respond to every bug report in detail, but
>has to either assign/resolve a bug or mark it as "not bug", etc.,
>specifying the reason for status change.

And it's already installed. We have a public Bugzilla at the W3C
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/

Right now it is used for

CSS validator
Link Checker
LogValidator
Validator

Maybe it could be used for WG. It's something to organize.



-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---

Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 18:46:25 UTC