W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > October 2007

comments on WDs and non-published WG documents

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:36:14 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <20071022.093614.20057610.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: hendler@cs.rpi.edu
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
Subject: Re: (resolution status/documents)Re: minutes for 17 October
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:50:48 -0400

[...]

> p.s. It is generally frowned upon for organizations who participate  
> in a WG to comment on drafts after publication, rather than in the WG  
> (because comments after a publication have a higher requirement for  
> tracking, etc.)  - so again, time to be sure is important.

I've had better tracking related to my comments on documents (published
and non-published) within a WG than with my comments on documents
(published, including LC, and non-published) that come from other WGs in
the Semantic Web activity.  Admittedly, the tracking systems are often
different for published documents, particularly LC, CR and PR, than they
are for non-published documents.  Also, this is just anecdotal evidence,
but I have generated quite a number of comments on various W3C
documents.

A reasonable tracking mechanism for comments should be able to send
email to the originator of the comment and even check if the originator
responded, which should suffice for tracking comments on regular WDs.

In any case, all we need to overcome this particular problem is to make
an internal editor's draft immediately after the WD and have WG member
organizations make comments against that inside the WG.

[...]

peter
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 13:44:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:26 GMT