RE: errata handling

> Sound okay?

In principle, sounds good. Some questions on item 3. ...

> 3.  When a comment comes in, people should talk about it on that list until consensus is
> reached, then document that consensus in errata.html.  Ivan Herman (as Semantic Web
> Activity Lead) is responsible for making sure that happens, but editors are encouraged to
> go ahead and handle it themselves if it's clear what to do.

... Is there any official process for comments handling once the group is closed?
E.g., Andy has answered to the last comment
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2013Mar/0011.html
and added somtheing on the Errata wiki page already:
  http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQL_Errata

Looks good to me, BTW, and should go to http://www.w3.org/2013/sparql-errata
plus probably we should point the commenter to that fact that it's taken into account in
the errata page, once there's consensus. The general question is:
 (a) how do we define "consensus is reached"?
 (b) who is responsible to make sure comment responses are sent and commenters
    are informed if their suggestion goes to the errata?

Am I right to assume that the following implies that Ivan is also in charge for (b)?
> The process documented on the errata page is that Ivan Herman will
> handle the errata, consulting people as necessary.   I'm not sure that's
> the best option, since he wasn't in the WG.

Best,
Axel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org]
> Sent: Dienstag, 26. März 2013 23:14
> To: Andy Seaborne
> Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org; Ivan Herman
> Subject: errata handling
>
> Okay, here's my plan:
>
> 1.  I've moved the errata document to errata.html in the group's CVS tree.  So
> all the editors can now update it.  That access isn't likely to go away.
> (It's available on the Web at http://www.w3.org/2013/sparql-errata since
> that's what the RECs point to)
>
> 2.  Everyone who wants to be involved in errata handling should
> subscribe to public-rdf-dawg-comments.     Probably you already are.
> I've noted this on the WG homepage.
>
> 3.  When a comment comes in, people should talk about it on that list until
> consensus is reached, then document that consensus in errata.html.  Ivan
> Herman (as Semantic Web Activity Lead) is responsible for making sure that
> happens, but editors are encouraged to go ahead and handle it themselves if
> it's clear what to do.
>
> Sound okay?
>
> BTW, I updated the group's home page, trying to make it something a little
> more suitable for eternity.
>
>       -- Sandro
>
>
> On 03/26/2013 12:27 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 26/03/13 16:15, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> >> On 03/26/2013 12:02 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >> The process documented on the errata page is that Ivan Herman will
> >> handle the errata, consulting people as necessary.   I'm not sure that's
> >> the best option, since he wasn't in the WG.
> >
> > OK -- that's the formal aspect, I was suggesting an informal
> > consolidation.
> >
> >>
> >> Are you available to help, via CVS, or a page on another wiki, or
> >> something?
> >
> > Yes, any/all of those.
> >
> >>
> >>            -- Sandro
> >>
> >>
> >>>     Andy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 08:09:48 UTC