Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

<yaso_> New agenda **https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160415

<scribe> scribe: phila

<scribe> scribenick: phila

PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

<yaso_> +1

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1

<antoine> +1

+1

<Caroline> +1

<BernadetteLoscio> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

<ericstephan> +1

yaso_: I was going to cancel the meeting today after Phil and Annette's concerns, but I suggest we can discuss the last changes
... But it looks like only Phil and Annette had time to read the doc carefully.
... I had a message from Augusto from the ministry of planning asking how he can contribute
... He wants to read the doc entirely
... Phi's suggestoons make sense, so I'm inclined to make this a 30 minute meeting
... so we can finish early and go to read the document
... Pay some attention to the changes and see what's the most important.
... So can Annette start by talking about the changes?
... Or the editors?

annette_g: I can just say that there's a list... I've been going through each BP more carefully than for a while.

<Caroline> -1 to finish this meeting earlier

annette_g: In my defnece, things have been changing rapidly, which is all to the good. It's becoming a doc I can get behind.
... But when I look I keep finding more that I want to comment on.

<Caroline> I think we should use this meeting to discuss issues that have been raised

annette_g: But I have given it a lot of time.
... I hope that we can work through these things and make it better.

BernadetteLoscio: I'd like to thank Phil and Annette for the detailed review.
... Phil for correcting the English
... Happy that we have a good feedback
... It's just good if we had had this before of course so we can continue with the schedule.
... We made some updates on the examples so that we have examples for all the BPs.
... Some comments are easy to address, others are not so easy, especially because they concern sections that are not... we had a lot of discussion about specific sections
... and we don't feel comfortable just changing according to the suggestions. We'll need WG discussion.
... SO we need more time, but we also need a deadline

<yaso_> +1 to BernadetteLoscio for the deadlines

BernadetteLoscio: By when WG members will complete the review, and now you can make the updates and set up issues.
... We need the feedback and we need the deadline.

yaso_: May I suggest the deadline will be 2 weeks' time.

BernadetteLoscio: I think that's too long. We need to publish the LC
... So I think 2 weeks is too long. If we have to update the doc after that it's going to take too long.
... The document is frozen last week, we had a week when we couldn't make any updates.
... If we stay 2 more weeks without working I think that's too long.

yaso_: OK, but I'm trying to accomodate everyone's suggestions.
... It's true that the Wg wasn't god at providing feedback on time.
... Maybe one more week.

<annette_g> one week would be enough for me.

ericstephan: I have a general comment. From an editor's perspective, it's exhausting.
... I can't imagine all the things the editors are going through.
... To capture all of these comments, I wonder whether we should identify issues rather they and fix the doc. use the tracker.

Caroline: I think Eric has a point. I wonder, it woujld be nice to hear from the WG - how long do you need.
... +1 to Eric on raising issues, then we can mark issues as having been solved.
... WE know the doc is very long.
... So we need to know how long reviers need.

annette_g: I agree that we can do our reviews in less than 2 weeks. 1 week is enough for me. We're getting to the point where we need to resolve these things.
... It's tempting to say there'll be another version. I'm feeling pressure that we need to finish.
... In the long run, it pays to handle these things earlier rather than later.

BernadetteLoscio: What we are planning is to collect the comments and then try and group them in sections.
... The try to make the updates in a mroe consistent way.
... That's why a deadline for the reviews is nice.
... We want any disagreements to be obvious from the reviews.
... We won't update the doc yet. We'll come up with proposals.

yaso_: Time frame?

BernadetteLoscio: annette_g Suggested one more week to finish the review and then after that the review time is over. Then we'll start to update the doc.
... SO maybe we'll need another week to make the updates.

<annette_g> you need separate non-review editorial time. If we take a week for reading, you need another week for editing.

ericstephan: That sounds reasonable. But I see that sometimes we're getting into infinite loop about certain topics and I'd suggest that when we get to where there is no agreement, we need a place to submit issues.

phila: Where there is no consensus - take that part out.

yaso_: I think we should have a vote on the new time line
... The it's up to the editors to decide whether there is or isn';t agreement.

laufer: A question for Phil, - if there is a deadline?
... We are in a loop. I don't understand how our comments can be too late.
... Otehrs will comment too. When does the loop end?
... If we have one week for comments, then a week for the editors, then we need another week to read what the editors have done - and we'll still have comments.
... What is the power of the editors to say - this is it.

<annette_g> I spent a whole day, too

phila: Talks about deadlines

laufer: The main goal of this draft is to enable people to make implementations]
... If no on eof the group has objections about the BP collection and that they are clear, why can't we deliver this draft? We can make some changes
... But for me I would vote on the doc today.

yaso_: Next Friday is a holiday in Brazil.

phila: If I were to vote today, I would vote no.
... I should have done it weeks/months ago. So should you (everyone)
... I want to cancel next Friday's call, but set a deadline for comments
... of Wednesday, leaving 10 days for the editors to make their changes by 29/4
... Then it's up to the editors to see if we have consensus.

laufer: We need a week with the frozen document.
... We will have the discussion, then the changes. We need the doc in a frozen state, So you think 5 days aren't enough.

<BernadetteLoscio> I think we should keep the call

Caroline: As yaso said, next friday is a holiday in Brazil, but we editors think we really should maintain this meeting. We're willing to go to the meeting next week.
... I guess non-Brazilians will be OK to be there.

phila: You have your frozen document

annette_g: I imagine there's enough in what Phil and I have written already that the editors could make a start
... you may not piush the changes but you can start

BernadetteLoscio: Just to say that the doc will be frozen this week and Annete just said what we said, yes, we'll keep the doc frozen.

<yaso_> acl laufer

laufer: Last meeting we voted about 3 BPs about which I have strong objections.
... I'm OK with this, If we dont;' include things where we have strong objections, then we won't have a document

Caroline: Just to make sure we discuss content next week
... We'll have feedback by mail, and then next week we can talk about content

<ericstephan> +1 Caroline

Caroline: So my proposal is that we keep discussing content and trying to figure out what changes to make. Next week we take the time to discuss the things that we can't resolve by e-mail.
... So we can finish editing the doc.

yaso_: So we can vote next Friday?
... Not next Friday, the 29th
... I'm trying to make sure finish.
... On 22 we talk about changes and suggestions.
... Then on 29 we vote on publication.
... Correct Caroline?

BernadetteLoscio: If we do this, then we won't have a week that the doc will be frozen again. This week the doc will be frozen. We'll work but we can't finish it.
... Then the week after to address the comments

<BernadetteLoscio> great!

<yaso_> +1 to phila

<laufer> the problem is not the review... the problem is to have an agreement with the comments about the reviews....

annette_g: I think we do need to include time for review just before the vote.
... There has to be some time for people to review what they're voting on. Maybe another week, or maybe a more granular time line
... WE do need a freeze before the vote

yaso_: Following Phil's mood, I don't think we need another week of frozen document

<ericstephan> :-)

<laufer> we have serious problems when we have a not frozen document to vote...

annette_g: Can we havea the diffs.

<laufer> had*

annette_g: I can't vote on a doc I haven't read.
... reading this big doc takes forever
... And we need time to do this

<BernadetteLoscio> the idea is to review during the next weeks

yaso_: It may not need a whole week

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to yaso_

annette_g: Indeed, it might not. Maybe a few days

yaso_: I'm thinking 2 days
... So freeze on Wed 27

<BernadetteLoscio> -1

<laufer> +1

annette_g: The Wed before the end of the month.

<BernadetteLoscio> I dont agree with frozen again

phila: The Diff tool is helpful. http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fdwbp%2Fbp.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fphilarcher1.github.io%2Fdwbp%2Fbp.html#dataFormats

<Caroline> -1 to frozen it again

BernadetteLoscio: The editors need to speak!
... We don't agree with frozen again. Maybe we won't need it, maybe we will.
... I think what we should do, we have to review now and then the editors will mtry to solve the conflicts, make proposals
... and we'll try to do this in the next 2 weeks.
... Before 29th, we need to have an agreement. If we don't have agreement, then we decide on 29th
... We need people to make the review now.
... It's not fair to give 2 more days of a froizen doc. That's not fair on us.
... If we're not ready, we'll say so.

yaso_: I really think people need a day or two to read the doc

<annette_g> +1 to yaso

yaso_: and we ned to close the loop. The 2 days are not to make chages, it's to read the doc before the voting.
... I think we need the time to read the doc, not to change it. Changes come before hand.
... the frozen days are to read the doc.
... ANd I agree with Berna that we have to make an effort to be ready for 29

<laufer> What will happend if someone do not agree with the new frozen document? I agree with Bernadette that the issues have to be solved in the email discussion. We have then to trust that the changes will be done.

<laufer> And then vote.

<ericstephan> 22

<BernadetteLoscio> +1 to laufer

phila: Scribe interrupt - what ahppens next week?

Wednesday 20th - deadline for comments

Friday 22 - discuss changes

BernadetteLoscio: It's like Laufer said, if we freeze, the loop is endless. We need a firm deadline

<laufer> Let´s say that we need 1 day to read the document that will be voted. And made our thinking about our vote.

<Caroline> I kindly ask that we solve this before ending this meeting

<annette_g> I cannot in good conscience agree to publish a document whose content I don't know.

[Discussion continues around deadlines and freezing]

<Caroline> please let Annette and Antoine talk

<Caroline> please!!!

annette_g: If we're going to do a vote, we need a chnace to read the doc in a stavble state. Small changes addressing other people's issues will potentially make the doc disagreeable to others.

<laufer> 1 day for reading a document that we have already read.

annette_g: It's unfair to ask people to vote on something they haven't read

<BernadetteLoscio> yes, that's the idea!!!! :)

<ericstephan> +1 antoine

antoine: I was about to ask whether it's possibel tuse this diff tool so that we'd have a snapshot every day. So you can see the day before the vote you get a quick overbiew of changes

<BernadetteLoscio> +1 to Antoine!!!!!

antoine: The you're voting on something that is under control.

yaso_: SO next week we'll discuss the changes

<Caroline> we will do what Antoine proposed. Does everyone agree?

yaso_: And the agenda is to look at changes made betwene now and then.

<laufer> +1 to antoine

<Caroline> we will send emails with the changes

<ericstephan> 20

Wednesday 20 - deadlien for review comments

<BernadetteLoscio> yes

Friday 22 we'll discuss issues arising from the review

between Friday 22 - and Wednesday 27th, nightly diffs?

<BernadetteLoscio> +q

yaso_: Stick to that timeline to next friday and then decide
... So Wednesday is the deadline for commnets
... from the WG. We can't predict the future

<laufer> may we extend this meeting a little more?

yaso_: (scribe paraphrase)

<Zakim> Caroline, you wanted to answer annette_g

BernadetteLoscio: Our idea is what Antoine said - we'll discuss the comments from Phil and Annete ASAP
... when we have a proposal, we'll make it
... And we'll start on that now
... We're going to show every update to the group.
... That's why I don't think it will be necessary to freeze. Look at the changes and comment immediately.

newton: +1 to BernadetteLoscio
... We don't need a snapshot
... We'll let the WG know every change we commit to github

yaso_: We should focus oin the netx week and decide what to do next Friday.
... we'll decide more then.
... So we decide next week on whetehr a freeze is necessary
... So thanks all. Please read the doc and suggest the changes before the voting.

<yaso_> +1 to phila

<riccardoAlbertoni> bye .. .

<ericstephan> bye everyone

<yaso_> bye all!

<annette_g> bye!

<laufer> bye all...