- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 22:40:03 -0400
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, "Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@apple.com)" <mjs@apple.com>
On 07/25/2011 01:13 PM, Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
> Thank you, Paul, for this clarification. The TAG held a call on 21 July
> 2011, but I was not able to participate. On that call, the TAG asked
> that I respond to you with the following:
>
> Thank you for clarifying the process options.
>
> The TAG is not quite clear how to proceed. Your final paragraph
> ("Since the TAG's plan appears to be to create a task force...")
> comes close to what we would like, in that it makes clear that as
> and when the task force reports one or more Issues can be created
> against bugs 13100 and 13101 [1], [2]. But from our perspective we
> would be happier if the Status of these bugs were such that they
> showed up in searches of Open bugs during the life of the proposed
> task force.
>
> In particular, it appears that if we don't want 13100 to be Closed
> officially on 1 August, we have to either escalate (not appropriate
> at this point) or reopen (not appropriate at this point). Could you
> please arrange for the bugs to just remain unclosed until, based on
> the task force outcome, the TAG either reopens it, escalates, or
> accepts the _status quo_ and closes it? Fullscale closure seems
> misleading as long as a task force is actively pursuing the
> matter . . .
The co-chairs have discussed this and agreed to not push this bug into
VERIFY state until the end of this calendar year. The operative
deadlines therefore are as follows:
We will need an issue to be raised by January 14, 2012, and a Change
Proposal to be completed by Feb 11, 2012. Of course, you are welcome to
either close the bug or raise an issue earlier before then.
Just to be clear: consequences of missing these dates will be that the
bug will likely be marked as POSTPONED. Furthermore, the bugs
themselves are to remain in a RESOLVED state until or unless you have
specific actionable information that you would like the _editor_ to
evaluate. If you simply have information that you would like the entire
Working Group to evaluate (or even a separate Task Force to work with),
then the status of the bug is to remain as RESOLVED (i.e., not on the
editor's queue)
Does this work for you?
- Sam Ruby
P.S. Even though it wasn't explicitly mentioned, we are willing to do
the same for bug 13101.
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2011 02:40:31 UTC