W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sparql-12@w3.org > April 2019

Re: Charter

From: Jerven Tjalling Bolleman <Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 23:07:34 +0200
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: public-sparql-12@w3.org
Message-ID: <732e1a155ed5a6a4c9a7c8a4619c30c8@bell.isb-sib.ch>
Hi Peter,
On 2019-04-21 16:37, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I'm confused.
> 
> How was a vote started in issue 2 
> (https://github.com/w3c/sparql-12/issues/2)?
The opening text of issue two ends with the phase
"This issue is to agree on the initial charter for the CG."

Which is a badly phrased way of saying this is a vote.
Like most things in software, this initial release is getting a bug fix 
:)

>  The initial message in this thread says
>>> We will open an issue for voting on the charter as proposed on
>>> github[1], on the 22th of April 2019 and voting will last till 2nd of
>>> May 2019 23:59 UTC.
> There is nothing in any of the comments in issue 2 concerning a vote.
> 
> How can the 10 thumbs up to the initial comment in that issue be 
> considered to
> be votes for the current charter?
It can't really which was the point of my second message ;)
Which is more about why things are being done the way they are.

The vote is still being opened tomorrow (probably around 09:30 Central 
European Time) depending on my availability.

Regards,
Jerven
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> On 4/21/19 8:52 AM, Jerven Tjalling Bolleman wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> A community group operates very different than a WG and a Charter
>> is not nearly as important in a CG. If you look at the guidance the CG 
>> starter
>> can just issue a charter, and this was done for example in the 
>> bioschemas CG
>> without any problems.
>> 
>> However, Andy and me don't think that doing things by fiat is a good 
>> way to
>> build community. So we started a vote in issue 2. Which currently has 
>> 10
>> positives and no negatives, except in the comments. Yet we didn't feel 
>> happy
>> about this as in hindsight it was not quite clear that this was a 
>> vote, how
>> long it would run and it was opened before people joined. Again making 
>> us feel
>> like we were not obviously measuring consensus.
>> 
>> Now we are both aware that there are holes to be pocked in the 
>> document as
>> written. We decided that we would rather have a flawed but fixable one 
>> than
>> spent lots of time to build a beautiful charter. Because we want to 
>> work on
>> making SPARQL more beautiful for people whom use it day to day.
>> 
>> Also looking at the wider SPARQL related ecosystem. We are going for 
>> small and
>> useful wins that implementer and their customers as well as the open 
>> source
>> groups find it worth to work on. With the idea that building on 
>> successes we
>> can tackle more difficult parts later on.
>> 
>> I would like to restate that the charter is easily changed later if 
>> there is
>> an actual need for it. For now I think we would like to think
>> about and work on the many interesting ideas on our issue tracker.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Jerven, Andy
>> 
>> PS. Sorry for the late reply. I ended up fighting with my home router 
>> which
>> decided to very much not implement the DNS and DHCP spec for a bit.
>> 
>> PPS. There is some activity in the EXISTS group about publishing the 
>> current
>> work. Which while not satisfactory for all involved at gives some 
>> closure to
>> this topic until a WG can pick it up.
>> 
>> On 2019-04-16 12:21, Jerven Bolleman wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> As chairs, we would like to have a charter in place soon.
>>> 
>>> We will open an issue for voting on the charter as proposed on
>>> github[1], on the 22th of April 2019 and voting will last till 2nd of
>>> May 2019 23:59 UTC.
>>> 
>>> You can record your vote for accept with a thumbs up, or reject with 
>>> a
>>> thumbs down. Any other "reaction/emotion" will be ignored. (Click on
>>> the +smiley face to show the thumbs up/down)
>>> 
>>> We will announce the vote issue on this mailing lists once it is 
>>> opened.
>>> 
>>> This will be an issue only to record voting, not for comments.
>>> Campaigning for or against should be done outside the voting issue.
>>> 
>>> We do wish to remind everyone that considering this only a Community
>>> Group changing the charter is not hard if it is needed. Yet,
>>> considering people went through legal with the current proposed one 
>>> we
>>> don't want to make their lives difficult with changes right now.
>>> 
>>> If anyone has issues voting on github you should let us know.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Jerven and Andy
>>> 
>>> [1] Specifically the fileĀ  docs/charter.html at commit
>>> 151e96ef942dc2a2c297b63caafbafe385af9f39
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-12/blob/151e96ef942dc2a2c297b63caafbafe385af9f39/docs/charter.html
>>> 
>> 

-- 
Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
SIB | Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
CMU - 1, rue Michel Servet - 1211 Geneva 4
t: +41 22 379 58 85 - f: +41 22 379 58 58
Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss - http://www.sib.swiss
Received on Sunday, 21 April 2019 21:08:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 21 April 2019 21:08:07 UTC