- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:52:41 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: W3C RDB2RDF <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
> The CR exit criteria is to be decided by the WG. *Usually* we say > that there should be 2 independent implementation for every feature > in the spec, but what 'every feature' means is up to us to decide. > And we may also formulate another criteria. Our charter [1] says: > Success Criteria > > • Timely preparation of the deliverables. See below. Yeah, right. > • At least two conforming implementations of the mapping language, > perhaps embedded into products that provide additional functionality. Ah! > • Mapping library for applications such as Drupal, Wordpress, or > phpBB Hu? Cheers, Michael [1] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/rdb2rdf-charter#scope -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html On 31 Jan 2012, at 15:48, Ivan Herman wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2012, at 16:29 , Richard Cyganiak wrote: > >> All, >> >> I've done some last pre-CR work on the R2RML ED: >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/ >> >> I made the HTML validate, fixed some broken links and anchors, >> updated some timestamped URLs, and started work on the SotD >> section. I've updated the “Changes since previous draft” section in >> the SotD. This section now references the following relevant links: >> >> * Detailed description of R2RML changes since the LC working draft: >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Last_Call_Changes_to_R2RML >> * Full diff of all changes since the LC working draft: >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/diffs/LC-CR.html >> >> Some work is still needed: >> >> - fill in some @@@'s in the SotD section >> - update timestamped links to other RDB2RDF drafts in the >> References section >> - make a timestamped copy in CVS, and in that copy: >> - update version URL in the header >> - apply CR stylesheet >> - remove CVS history section (also from ToC) >> >> In particular I need input regarding the CR exit criteria for the >> SotD, and help with the other SotD boilerplate. Ivan? > > The CR exit criteria is to be decided by the WG. *Usually* we say > that there should be 2 independent implementation for every feature > in the spec, but what 'every feature' means is up to us to decide. > And we may also formulate another criteria. > > I guess there was some sort of an agreement on not defining another > mailing list for the comments (which is fine with me, b.t.w.). > > Anything else? > > Ivan > > > >> >> Best, >> Richard > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 15:53:21 UTC