- From: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:39:50 +0100
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- CC: W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
No different timeframe envisaged. If someone else picks up the other topics in separate notes, they can run in parallel. I think we've enough on our plate to wrap up what we have by November (allowing for summer break, and just getting stuff through the due process). In my experience, last calls rarely go so smoothly, as that's when we get serious attention from outside the WG. #g -- On 25/06/2012 12:22, Paul Groth wrote: > Hi Graham, > > So at the F2F, we said that we would try to finish all Notes by > November given that we need to ask for an extension to finish our > recs. Did you have a different timeline in mind? > > My personal goal was to get all internal working group comments, > issues and feature requests in with the next two weeks and then see > what we can/want to do in the time remaining. Sorry, I should have > coordinated a bit better with you on this. > > cheers > Paul > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne<GK@ninebynine.org> wrote: >> Other description languages are possible, and can be implemented. If anyone >> really wants this, I'd suggest writing it up as a separate note. Otherwise I >> think we'll run out of time, as it will be hard to know where to draw the boundary. >> >> #g >> -- >> >> On 23/06/2012 20:10, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>> ISSUE-434: Look at wadl or some other description language for the service - is it possible? do we have time? paq >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/434 >>> >>> Raised by: >>> On product: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 25 June 2012 21:47:58 UTC