- From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:51:31 -0500
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
* Doug Bunting <db134722@iPlanet.com> [2002-03-29 12:38-0800] > With D-AG0014, we never got to CSF's due to our focus on removing it as a > separate goal... > > We may want to include CSF's similar to ones we described on an early > teleconference call while discussing the issues list. How about items such > as: > * Respond to issues submitted within 1 week. [Point to related issues, > answer the question, tell them where it is in the queue, et cetera. This > doesn't mean the problem will be solved within this time.] > * Address problems others find and submit to us through forwarding to the > appropriate group, changes to our reference architecture or other means. > [timeframe? maybe, "in the next version of the architecture document or by > the time of its publication"] > * Receive comments and questions from 50% of our targeted / relevant groups > each quarter. [Not sure how to describe this one but we need some measure > for other groups within and beyond the W3C paying attention to our > architecture.] I believe that those points are documented in the Web Services Architecture Issues Process[1] that Dave and Tom started drafting. I don't know what the status of this document is. The version I am referencing never made it from the editors' list to the public list because it is a first rough draft. Adding some of those as CSFs is OK with me, but I would refrain from hardcoding durations and similar numbers in there. What about just say that a critical success factor is to address issues that are submitted to us, with an informative link to our issue process? Regards, Hugo 1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wsa-editors/2002Mar/att-0005/05-wsawg-issues-process-draft.html -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/ - tel:+1-617-452-2092
Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2002 16:51:32 UTC