W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > December 2009

Re: Extending the Media Fragments WG

From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:06:25 +0100
Message-ID: <4B211C81.7080804@w3.org>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: public-media-fragment@w3.org
Yes I agree the WG should publish a FPWD, it does not need to be totally 
finalized. Yves and I have explained that already to the WG.
Better to have multiple draft publications instead of publishing a FPWD 
and LCWD.


fantasai wrote:
> Thierry Michel:
>> During the Interaction Domain telecon yesterday, we have discussed the 
>> extension of the Media Fragments Charter, which ends in January 2010.
>> Philippe would like to see the Media Fragments WG publish a Last Call 
>> WD version of Media Fragments URI 1.0 before requesting this extension 
>> to W3M.
>> This would definitively ease the process for rechartering.
>> When are we targeting the LC publication of this specification ?
> How about publishing a FPWD first? I keep looking through your logs,
> and you keep pushing back the publication date because there's still
> issues with the spec.
> You don't have to solve all issues in the spec to publish FPWD!
> You don't even have to *identify* all the issues; it is expected that
> a FPWD will have issues. But if you've identified some issues, you
> can put
>  <p class="issue">There's an issue here that needs to be resolved,
>  [some more details on what the issue is]</p>
> style .issue { color: maroon; } and then publish.
> It would be much more helpful to other WGs and to other people who
> want to comment on your spec (and give you more issues to work on!)
> if you would publish an official Working Draft. Release early, release
> often. I cannot think of a single reason why you should not publish
> asap. Your work is not a secret: your draft is already public. But it
> is relatively hard to find and other WGs cannot reference it. Please,
> just put it up in /TR already and address the issues in the next
> working draft. It is very disingenuous of you to keep a public working
> draft (in official Working Draft regalia!) and refuse to actually
> publish it through the official channels.
> ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 16:06:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:43 UTC