Just that it has become worse with online documents.
>> I have no real issue closing out comments after the review.
+1.
>> are a lot better than sending around word docs with track changes on tho.
I agree, collating feedback from multiple Word documents is a lot harder for accommodating the smaller comments (i.e., those comments which should be handled later offline).
It would have been ideal if (online) document review tools had the following features:
(a) Allow the reviewers to mark their own comments on importance. I would find this useful even as a reviewer so that I can bring up only the important points into the verbal discussion. It would also be helpful if I can mark some comments as intended for myself only.
(b) Submitting the key comments first (using 'a' above), subsequently the remaining ones after the meeting.
>> I'm with you on filtering out the key points. But I felt I had to do that in paper meetings as well.
Agreed. Even for the verbal discussions after paper meetings, the law of triviality still usually applies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality
Just that it has become worse with online documents.
>> I have no real issue closing out comments after the review.
+1.
>> are a lot better than sending around word docs with track changes on tho.
I agree, collating feedback from multiple Word documents is a lot harder for accommodating the smaller comments (i.e., those comments which should be handled later offline).
It would have been ideal if (online) document review tools had the following features:
(a) Allow the reviewers to mark their own comments on importance. I would find this useful even as a reviewer so that I can bring up only the important points into the verbal discussion. It would also be helpful if I can mark some comments as intended for myself only.
(b) Submitting the key comments first (using 'a' above), subsequently the remaining ones after the meeting.