- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:38:04 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I think it is fine for any WG member who knows the answer to respond to those factual comments/questions. Unless the commenter specifies that they are unhappy with the design, we do not need an acknowledgement from them. Lee On 9/19/2011 10:25 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > Is a response needed for DB-8? [1] > > I asked David if a response is needed but haven't had a reply [2]. > > More generally: > We have some straight factual comments (eg. 2011Sep/0013) and the > current comments process is a bit heavy weight for these. Can we have a > lighter weight mechanism for non-LC factual comments? > > Andy > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Sep/0001 > > [2] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Sep/0006 > >
Received on Monday, 19 September 2011 14:38:46 UTC