Ross Patterson <m...@rpatterson.net> writes: > Tom Lazar <li...@tomster.org> writes: > >> On 18.12.2008, at 11:48, Wichert Akkerman wrote: >> >>> On 12/18/08 11:43 AM, Tom Lazar wrote: >>>>> and therefore should be reflected in the membership of the >>>>> group which makes decisions based on those factors. >>>> >>>> i think that conclusion is the only part where we disagree. can we >>>> agree at least on that? ;-) >>> >>> Not without a way to guarantee that user interface will be a full >>> part of the process, which incudes the guarantee that everything >>> will go through a proper user interface review done by people with >>> the right skillset, and can be rejected even if just the user >>> interface is not up to par. > ... >> >> but perhaps we could make the 'UI impact component' a formal part of >> the evaluation of a PLIP, i.e. add it as a formal part of the >> structure of a PLIP (in addition to the current ones such as >> Deliverables, Participants etc.) >> >> that way the issue could never be missed (i imagine that many UI flaws >> come into existence because technical people didn't realize there >> *was* a UI perspective to the given issue). Also, it would make it >> easy to get an overview of the UI impact of all of the submitted PLIPs >> by simply focussing on those parts of the PLIPs. >> >> anybody care to add their $0.02? > > It seems clear that everyone agrees that UI concerns need to be included > in the review process. There doesn't seem to be agreement on retracting > the FWT selection. For my money, I think any sort of retraction or > re-openning of the process would be a mistake. > > I also think that simply saying "Don't worry, we'll consider UI" could > be inadequate to ensure UI is considered sufficiently. It is most > certainly inadequate to redress the concerns of those who raise the > complaint and agree with it. > > So I think it makes a lot of sense to find an alternate way to formalize > the inclusion of UI concerns into the review process. As such I'm +1 on > formalizing the 'UI impact component' part of the PLIP process. More > specifically I think we should require that every PLIP have a UI expert > weigh in on the estimation of UI considerations and if a PLIP has UI > considerations then we should require that a UI expert fully reviews > those UI impacts.
Oh, BTW, I'm +10 for doing the same for Documentation. Ross _______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team