A hard problem in many collaborative efforts to make technical things (such as writing Web standards, and I suspect also in writing laws and regulations) is that you can end up with bad output because people support things that are at a high level a good idea... 1/3
1
3
... without making it clear who is responsible for reviewing all the details and ensuring that the details have been properly reviewed. What is needed, and often doesn't happen, is detailed technical review by a small number (1-3?) of people with relevant expertise. 2/3
1
8
I think it's important for standards processes to clearly assign this responsibility, and give time for it to happen. I think a working mode where even the editor needs to get changes reviewed (as in @WHATWG) is probably helpful here. 3/3

Aug 16, 2018 · 10:03 PM UTC
8