W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2011

SPARQL TC tomorrow "agenda" and regrets

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:39:36 +0200
Message-Id: <A40CA4FC-D7D5-4FA7-B1D4-B737039BBFD3@deri.org>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Dear all,

we might have some chairing difficulty tomorrow, but hopefully Sandro can jump in. 
The main agendum from my side is:

* Vote on (2nd) LC or CR publications on all docs on http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/PostLastCall

As I can't be there to vote tomorrow: I am fine for publish for all docs, if the editors are.
As for SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol, here is my *personal opinion*:  if not done so 
already in today's taskforce call, issues should be resolved after Christmas and we may postpone 
publication for this one doc, but should strive for publication of all others by Christmas.

* As for ACTION-569: when publishing we shouldn't forget to  have some template text (bold face?) that we might skip to PR with out CR 
on drafts where the implementation requirements are already met. I herewidth suggest the following simple standard sentence 
for all our LC publications in this round to be added in bold face or inside a box in the "Status Section":

 "The SPARQL WG is considering publishing the next iteration of this document directly as Proposed Recommendation, if the implementation requirements 
 that normally have to be proven during Candidate Recommendation phase are already fulfilled, see http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html" 

Please discuss if possible, if this is sufficient, or whether this sentence needs adaption.

Thanks, all from my side  & best regards,
Received on Monday, 19 December 2011 15:47:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:05 UTC