Re: [Bulk] Re: Forums

Right. It probably has to be the same person as the one who presented the 
issues at the WG telcon. To avoid loosing too much time on this, that person 
could simply respond with a set of generic messages.

(1) this issue will be debated at a next telcon/f2f.

(2) this issue has been debated but is not resolved yet. see 
http://www.w3.org/blog/CSS/2011/12/14/resolutions-16/ for more information.
(3) this issue has been resolved. see 
http://www.w3.org/blog/CSS/2011/12/14/resolutions-16/ for more information.

(4) we need more information about the issue. [some specific message].

(5) this issue has been closed because there's no strong use case / a good 
work-around exists / it is too complex to implement.
(6) this issue has been accepted. changes will be made to the spec soon. see 
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-ui for more information.

I don't think anybody in the WG is ready to take much time in maintaining a 
more complex communication for all open tickets. Anyway, I don't know much 
user-request sites where a lot of issues get a response from the authority. 
Generally, a reply is issued only when the issue is on strong consideration 
or has been resolved which usually don't happens a lot. Even then, the 
communication is really short. I don't think a lot of people care about a 
personnal response. We know when posting ideas to such a website we're not 
alone and that not all issues will be considered.

Other maintenance tasks (delete spam, merge issues, ...) can be delegated to 
a group of people that is not necessarily make of WG members.

Also, WG members can take on their own to post more detailled replies to 
issues they are personnally involved. But it doesn't have to be the rule.




-----Message d'origine----- 
From: Rob Crowther
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 11:48 AM
To: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: Forums

On 07/01/12 10:26, François REMY wrote:
> (3) someone in the group responsible to scan new entries from time to
> time and present them in f2f, telcon or based on any other regular 
> schedule

For people to remain interested in the system someone would also have to
be responsible for posting responses to the entries after they've been
presented to the WG, and probably after any resulting edits had been
made to the spec.

Rob

Received on Saturday, 7 January 2012 11:29:22 UTC