W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > July 2011

[Fwd: Re: [Bug 13100] TAG issue on HTML+RDFa and Microdata last call drafts]

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 14:51:05 +0100
Message-ID: <4E2EC649.8090106@webr3.org>
To: RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
FYI, some dates.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Bug 13100] TAG issue on HTML+RDFa and Microdata last call 

On 07/25/2011 01:13 PM, Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
> Thank you, Paul, for this clarification. The TAG held a call on 21 July
> 2011, but I was not able to participate. On that call, the TAG asked
> that I respond to you with the following:
> Thank you for clarifying the process options.
> The TAG is not quite clear how to proceed. Your final paragraph
> ("Since the TAG's plan appears to be to create a task force...")
> comes close to what we would like, in that it makes clear that as
> and when the task force reports one or more Issues can be created
> against bugs 13100 and 13101 [1], [2]. But from our perspective we
> would be happier if the Status of these bugs were such that they
> showed up in searches of Open bugs during the life of the proposed
> task force.
> In particular, it appears that if we don't want 13100 to be Closed
> officially on 1 August, we have to either escalate (not appropriate
> at this point) or reopen (not appropriate at this point). Could you
> please arrange for the bugs to just remain unclosed until, based on
> the task force outcome, the TAG either reopens it, escalates, or
> accepts the _status quo_ and closes it? Fullscale closure seems
> misleading as long as a task force is actively pursuing the
> matter . . .

The co-chairs have discussed this and agreed to not push this bug into
VERIFY state until the end of this calendar year.  The operative
deadlines therefore are as follows:

We will need an issue to be raised by January 14, 2012, and a Change
Proposal to be completed by Feb 11, 2012.  Of course, you are welcome to
either close the bug or raise an issue earlier before then.

Just to be clear: consequences of missing these dates will be that the
bug will likely be marked as POSTPONED.  Furthermore, the bugs
themselves are to remain in a RESOLVED state until or unless you have
specific actionable information that you would like the _editor_ to
evaluate.  If you simply have information that you would like the entire
Working Group to evaluate (or even a separate Task Force to work with),
then the status of the bug is to remain as RESOLVED (i.e., not on the
editor's queue)

Does this work for you?

- Sam Ruby

P.S.  Even though it wasn't explicitly mentioned, we are willing to do
the same for bug 13101.
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2011 13:51:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:52 UTC