W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: rq24 ready for publication

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 13:51:51 +0100
Message-Id: <9B9795F0-4880-4C5A-8992-4F0F1F906B42@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: andy.seaborne@hp.com

On Sep 21, 2006, at 1:14 PM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

> Bijan Parsia wrote:
>> On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:05 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:39:02AM +0100, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>>> On Sep 21, 2006, at 10:16 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the editor's eyes, rq24 is ready to go out the door.
>>>> Is this that draft:
>>>> 	http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq24.html
>>>>
>>>> And thus the one I should skim-review?
>>> Indeed. The issues have been whittled down to 2, summary statement
>>> removed. Keep in mind that this is for a heartbeat publication
>> Actually, it's not just that, or even primarily that, at this  
>> point.  It's the publication of a working draft which, thus,  
>> changes where we  are in the process. I.e., we are no longer in  
>> CR, and will have  another last call.
>> Furthermore, I do believe I understood quite well my action from  
>> the  working group. Indeed, "skim-review" suggests that most  
>> strongly.
>>> and not
>>> something we're hoping to carry down from the mountain.
>> That is, of course, true of just about any WD except perhaps LC WD.
>> Cheers,
>> Bijan.
>
> The minutes of 5th Septmember [*] record the decision of the WG:
>
> """
> <kendallclark> PROPOSAL: To publish rq24 on or shortly after 19  
> September,
> after a sanity-check review by BijanP, and after SOTD updates by  
> EricP.
> """

Yep, and what I'm trying to determine is if this draft is the one I'm  
supposed to sanity-check?

(I intend to achieve the sanity-check by a skim-review :))

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2006 12:52:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:27 GMT