{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136/events","html_url":"https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136","id":178391705,"number":136,"title":"A spec style/structure checklist?","user":{"login":"slightlyoff","id":97331,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/97331?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff","html_url":"https://github.com/slightlyoff","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/slightlyoff/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2016-09-21T16:04:14Z","updated_at":"2016-09-27T13:09:29Z","closed_at":null,"body":"In discussion with @ r12a, it seemed like many groups doing reviews of specs would benefit from better guidance to spec authors about how to structure their documents and design docs / explainers. Is this something we have the appetite to produce?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/comments/249859735","html_url":"https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136#issuecomment-249859735","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/136","id":249859735,"user":{"login":"sideshowbarker","id":194984,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/194984?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker","html_url":"https://github.com/sideshowbarker","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/sideshowbarker/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-09-27T13:09:29Z","updated_at":"2016-09-27T13:09:29Z","body":"> had some discussion with @sideshowbarker about editor's training. Adding him into this loop.\r\n\r\nI have nothing to add at this point other than to say, Yeah we need to produce some guidelines docs for spec editors in WGs (along with guidelines docs for test writers in WGs). I guess we (at least @plh and I) just need to put a more concrete plan/timeline behind it."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"sideshowbarker"}}