W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Call for editors

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:43:36 -0500
To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20051130144337.BB6A04F40A@homer.w3.org>


> It seems to be rather premature to be asking for editors for *all* of 
> the deliverables at this stage given that there has yet to be a meeting 
> or even any substantive discussion amongst the participants in the WG, 
> and that there is still no clear idea as to what form the rule language 
> will take (the charter is pretty vague about this). Under these 
> circumstances, I assume that what is written in the charter about 
> deliverables should also be treated only as guidance, so we can't even 
> be sure at this stage exactly what will be required in terms of 
> deliverables.
> 
> I can see that it makes sense to get a "Use Cases and Requirements" 
> editor in place sooner rather than later, but beyond that I don't see 
> the advantage of unseemly haste, and I see many possible disadvantages.

Yes, getting editors in place for the "Issues List" and the "Use Cases
and Requirements" is certainly the higher priority, and it would be
pre-mature to select all the editors right now.

We wanted to open the floor wider so we could beging to figure out
whether we have too many or too few people wanting to be editors, and
to begin to see if they match up with the deliverables at all.  Do we
have 15 people wanting to edit the technical spec and no one wanting
to edit the Use Cases document?  If so, we'll want to try to convince
some to switch their focus, and see if we can break the technical spec
up, as was done with OWL.

Perhaps it would help to soften to call: rather than "tell us whether
you are volunteering", to "let us know your level of interest in being
an editor, and which deliverables you are interested/willing to work
on."    

Does that address your concern?

Also, I think we'll want to do a WG glossary, at least for internal
use and maybe becoming part of a deliverable.  And editor for that
could be useful, otherwise we can try using a Wiki (or maybe both).

      -- sandro
Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2005 14:43:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:24 GMT