Comment on the proposed labels

(Ie, on https://w3c.github.io/issue-metadata.html)

While adopting the labels, I have made two changes for the repository; I would think it is better:

1. (this is minor) I have added the label 'propose closure': ie, proposal to close an issue (but the WG has to accept this). This procedural step has proven to be fairly useful in some groups where we worked with github
2. the proposal contains over 30 labels, it is not easy to find one's way through them. I have systematically added a prefix to the main categories, ie, hr: for horizontal review, ms: for milestones, etc. For consistency, I also used wr: instead of WR- for wide review. I think such prefixes help a lot; eg, it allows a proper alphanumeric sorting of the labels.

Start by reviewing the proposed labels at https://w3c.github.io/issue-metadata.html and comparing them with the two repository changes described in the issue. Done means the maintainers have decided whether to adopt the “propose closure” label and the category prefixes; the issue does not name implementation files or tests.