On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:21:20 +0100, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Since when did we start putting the onus on the reviewer that her or >> his feedback is captured? > > Before I started working with W3C in the mid 90's (although as noted below > it is part of a set of checks and balances).
Given the scarcity of quality review that seems bad. > Indeed. And we expect the editor to do that to the best of their ability. In > the past, where editors were actually editing a document that was produced > more directly by the whole Working Group, the group itself also assumed some > of that function. > > But editors are not infallible, and the new model Working Group tends to be > less hands-on about directing the editor. I believe largely at the perceived > behest of a handful of high-profile editors such as yourself. > > So in practice the necessity for a commenter to check that their comment was > understood correctly and correctly acted on has become a little more > prominent in the overall balance of how things are done. Sad to learn this is how WebApps tries to run things. Both as editor and reviewer I find this unacceptable. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
