- From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 18:21:14 +0200
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- CC: Silvia Pfieffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, W3C Public TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>
On 19/06/2015 18:14, David Singer wrote: > Sorry, I am not being clear. > > It’s no concern to the WG is the editors start using different tools. Editor can choose whatever tool they like to produce the source of the draft, as long as it is Tr valid and pubrules compliant. So, something about changing from respec to Echidna has more effect than this, and that effect needs WG approval. - Respec is a tool to produce the spec. - Echidna is a publishing tool (replacing the current publishing process with webmaster). but we can still use the current publication process if we don't want to change to Echidna. BtW we will still be using the regiular publishing process for CR, PR Rec and FPWD. > > What is it that I am asking the WG to approve? I suspect it’s auto-publishing, no? the WG approuve using Echidna and the way the Wg approuval is done (onece or multiple). Best, Thierry > > >> On Jun 19, 2015, at 9:09 , Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 19/06/2015 17:55, David Singer wrote: >>> >>>> On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:47 , Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19/06/2015 11:44, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >>>>> I'm in favour of using this approach, but I'm going to have to let >>>>> Philip speak, too, since he has automated the publishing approach for >>>>> the WebVTT spec. >>>> >>>> Sure. >>>>> >>>>> WebVTT is written in respec, so it will be ready to adapt. >>>> >>>> good news. should be easy to provide a TR ready WD then. >>>>> >>>>> David, I believe you will have to ask the TTWG for approval to take this >>>>> approach next. The rest should be simple. >>>> >>>> Yes that is the way to go. >>> >>> OK. what is the functional change that needs the TTWG approval, i.e. what effect does this have that they need to approve? Does this mean, for example, we’re moving to auto-publish? >>> >> I am not sure what you mean by auto-publish (it isn't really automatic ;-) >> but the editor for example can publish in TR (without the need of Team contact nor Webmaster). >> But there are two way for the TTWG to agree on such process: >> >> - a TTWG agreement for *all* future WebVTT WDs . In that case the editor can publish in the future whenether he wants, without having to request publication approuval to the WG. >> - a TTWG agreement *each* time the WG publishes a WebVTT WD. This gives more control of the document to the TTWG, I guess. >> >> Hope it clarifies your question. >> >> Best, >> >> Thierry > > David Singer > Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc. >
Received on Friday, 19 June 2015 16:21:22 UTC