Re: JSON-LD CR on hold for 2-3 weeks

On 15 August 2013 22:31, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:

> On Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:10 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > On 15 August 2013 21:57, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 15, 2013 7:44 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> >> On 08/15/2013 01:19 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> >> > Perhaps we can shorten the CR period to compensate this delay a bit
> >> > given that we already have more than enough implementations!?
> >>
> >> Another option to consider is skipping CR and going to straight to PR.
> >> If the CR exit criteria have already been met, this can be done.
> >
> > Just as a (poorly sourced) data point, afaik the Google JSON-LD parser
> > doesn't do anything with remote contexts.  A CR period seems one way
> > of finding out.
>
> Does that mean that Google would send in an implementation report?
>

No promises but I was expecting there to be a CR, and for that to be a
trigger to chase around to gather input for some kind of 'what we did with
implementing JSON-LD' statement. What would you want in an implementation
report, exactly?


> I don't think that we really need a formal CR phase for this. Sending out
> a request for implementation reports to the mailing lists would achieve
> almost the same.
>

You could say that about much of W3C process, perhaps. If the overhead of
doing a real CR is too much, it would be good to communicate that to W3C so
that process might be fixed rather than leave it as abandonware and
reimplement a CR-lite-via-email. Ignoring/skipping W3C process steps
because they're burdensome is a good recipe for them staying that way :(

Dan