W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: book-keeping & suggesting some PROPOSALs to approve per email

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 11:09:08 +0000
Cc: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B8585D1A-A8E3-4703-8BAB-6E70240C13BA@garlik.com>
To: "Polleres, Axel" <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
+1

but I prefer removing unapproved test cases altogether, removing them from the manifest isn't enough.

- Steve

On 18 Dec 2012, at 10:29, Polleres, Axel wrote:

> Reading the recent comments and mails, it sounds to me that we probably may need at least to make some
> decisions (mostly book-keeping). I don’t think that any of these issues prevent us from publishing
> as planned, but it would be good to have them clarified:
>  
> I see the following:
> 1)      Minor editorial fixes in drafts before publication http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012OctDec/0211.html
> 2)      Test suite bugs
> 3)      Removing uncommented test cases
>  
> I hope we can sort these things out per email, so I’m giving it a try, please post your replies or comments to the following proposals to the list:
>  
> PROPOSED: approve editorial fix in query as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012OctDec/0210.html
> PROPOSED: approve editorial fix in Overview as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012OctDec/0209.html
>  PROPOSED: remove all unapproved test cases from the manifests (and move them to a separate folder for “unapproved” test cases)
>  
> If a sufficient quorum has time and enthusiasm to gather on IRC today at the regular time, maybe some of the things can be sorted out/further discussed there quickly (unfortunately, I won’t be able to make it). Otherwise, just in case, if we have any concerns on  the proposals above which we can’t sort out per email I suggest:
>  
> PROPOSED:  Telco:  15 Jan 2013,  Time of Call: 15:00 UK, 10:00 (East US) … if any of the proposals above raises objections
>  
> FWIW, I vote “+1” to all of the above.
>  
> Best  regards,
> Axel
>  
> p.s.: this does not yet contain any proposal on how to proceed with the comment we got on the protocol validator, cf.http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Dec/0006.html ... hope this will sorty out per email, if
> someone more swapped in could take care, it’d be appreciated!

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO
Garlik, a part of Experian
+44 7854 417 874  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 11:09:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:49 GMT