Re: PLEASE VOTE on publishing BP

Hi all

+1 to publish the Best Practices for Publishing Linked Data, aimed at
government content.



On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

>  Summary: should we go ahead and publish bp as it stands today?   vote
> asap.
>
> Following the emails of yesterday [1] [2], there's been some disagreement
> about whether it might still be possible to publish Best Practices.   The
> chairs have agreed to hold an email vote this week; deadline is the end of
> the usual meeting time (about 26 hours from when I'm sending this).     If
> you have a problem with this deadline, please say so, but we don't have a
> lot of options.   We wont physically be able to publish until January, so
> if you have a procedural complain in the next two weeks, there will be time
> to consider it.
>
> There will be an informal meeting, at the usual time tomorrow, during
> which people can discuss BP if they want, but the email votes will be what
> counts.
>
> The document under consideration is here (frozen):
>
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/4dbafa673d70/bp/index.html
>
> and the diff from Friday's version is here:
>
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/bp/diff-1213-1218.html
>
> Please respond via email with a vote (+1 if you support, 0 abstain, -1
> formal objection, in between to show nuance if you want) on the proposal
> below.   If you would vote higher with some small edit, please provide the
> edit and we'll try to see if there's email consensus for it.   Feel free to
> make other statements, but please keep it brief.   If anyone votes -1 or if
> only a few people vote +1, the document will be left unpublished (but still
> in its current location on the web).
>
> *PROPOSED: Publish*
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/4dbafa673d70/bp/index.html, with
> minimal edits necessary to make it pubrules compliant and fix simple
> typos.    We believe that the document in its current form expresses Best
> Practices for publishing Government Linked Data.   We understand it might
> be updated by another group in the future or might remain as-is.
>
> Thank you for your prompt response.
>
>        -- Sandro (in consultation with the chairs & Phil)
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Dec/0069.html
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Dec/0071.htmletc
>