Re: regrets for anticipated teleconf 11-Dec-2014 (tomorrow)

Jeremy,

Following up on this: I agree that we shouldn’t kill ourselves trying to get this out before Xmas, but we should aim to publish very early in January.

Is the document at http://w3c.github.io/csvw/csv2json/ the one that you want published? If so, we will take a vote on it next week. If not, please could you update to the latest version.

Thanks,

Jeni

-----Original Message-----
From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Reply: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>>
Date: 10 December 2014 at 08:11:23
To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>>
Cc: W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>>
Subject:  Re: regrets for anticipated teleconf 11-Dec-2014 (tomorrow)

> Jeremy et al,
>  
> I try to put my staff-contact hat on...
>  
> To get these documents published as FPWD, we need:
>  
> 1. a formal vote of the WG to move ahead
> 2. a request from Ralph Swick to approve the publication, more exactly to approve the  
> 'short name' (that is necessary for a FPWD only, subsequent publications may skip this)  
> 3. get the document through the hurdles of the pubrules' checker, including installing  
> the document on the W3C site, get it through respec, etc.
> 4. get it on the calendar of the webmaster who would publish the document. This should  
> be done 1-2 days minimum before the targeted publication date
>  
> Publications occur on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the last available date before XMas  
> is the 18th, ie, next week Thursday.
>  
> I wonder whether it is worth the trouble to push this through in high speed, and whether  
> it is realistic. Even if we do #1 through email, that takes 1-2 days, we cannot expect people  
> to be on line all the time. Although part of #2-#4 can be done in parallel, those also take  
> time.
>  
> So... I wonder whether it is not more realistic to aim at, say, #1 and #3 be done before Xmas,  
> maybe issue the request to Ralph (#2), but aim at a very early January publication. Actually,  
> the best would be if we could do that together with a republication of the metadata and  
> syntax documents, too (those two do not need #2, and even #1 is much looser).
>  
> Ivan
>  
>  
>  
>  
> > On 09 Dec 2014, at 17:17 , Jeremy Tandy wrote:
> >
> > All - although I haven’t seen an agenda for a meeting tomorrow (11-Dec) I anticipate  
> that there will be one.
> >
> > Unfortunately I will not be able to participate due to other commitments.
> >
> > As of right now, I have done a significant edit on the JSON mapping document; I am working  
> in my local repo and will do a pull request soon (hopefully today) to get my changes in to  
> w3c/csvw:gh-pages. It may not be finished, but we’re getting there. I expect the RDF  
> mapping doc to be broadly similar. I have worked through all the issues, meeting minutes  
> and draft documents and have drafted what needs to go into both documents … it just needs  
> to be HTML-ified (and converted into ‘proper’ English with a logical structure!).
> >
> > I know that we’re still aiming for FPWD on these two docs _before Christmas_. The last  
> date is 19-Dec, so I would hope to have a vote next week (or by email correspondence) to  
> publish FPWD.
> >
> > There are a bunch of issues in the [GitHub repo][1] to discuss. But here’s a short list  
> of the ones that I’d really like some feedback on if you have time to discuss:
> >
> > - Are the abstract tabular data and the CSV that encodes it the same thing? [#93]
> > - Making `schema` property mandatory for table description objects & explicit identification  
> of schemas [#94]
> >
> > Many thanks, Jeremy
> >
> > [1]:https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/
> >
>  
>  
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  

--  
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/

Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2014 15:37:30 UTC