W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > January 2009

Re: new editor's draft available

From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:15:59 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <1484.77.195.243.49.1232561759.squirrel@webmail.sophia.w3.org>
To: "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: "Thierry Michel" <tmichel@w3.org>, "WebCGM WG" <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>


> Hi Thierry,
>
> In it is not a big problem, then let's go ahead and publish relatively
> soon.

OK. Thanks for your editor's work on the document.

>
> Do we need a WG resolution to do that?

No we don't. This is not a Transition, only a new publication of an
ordinary draft.

> Document needs:
> 1.) validate (DONE)
Good
> 2.) pub rules check (needed)

I will do it

> 3.) SoTD, including unique sentence about this version (needed)
I will also do it

> 4.) Other?

I will check broken links, CSS, etc.

And I will request Publication.

We should decide a publication date. (give a least 5 days for the
publication Team).


Let me know when the document is ready and frozen on your side and I will
make the necessary changes.

Thanks,

Thierry



>
> Thanks,
> -Lofton.
>
>
> At 11:19 AM 1/21/2009 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote:
>
>> > Thierry,
>> >
>> > I think option #1 is ruled out.  The test suite is incomplete and
>> > implementations are very incomplete.  I guess we could actually have a
>> > very
>> > long CR, but we would surely return to LC thereafter (then maybe go
>> > straight to PR).  And ... I don't think anyone believes that the spec
>> is
>> > stable yet.
>> >
>> > I think #2 sounds best.  We would publish a new WD to incorporate the
>> LC
>> > feedback, then continue with spec development in the WG (and have a
>> 2nd LC
>> > "in a while").
>> >
>> > If we did option #3, then it would be almost 6 months between
>> publishing
>> > 1st LC and the next publication (2nd LC).  Would that be problematic
>> to
>> > have no publication for that long?
>> >
>> > -Lofton.
>>
>>
>>Well it would not be problematic, but W3C recommends to publish every 3
>>months (which a lot of WGs don't do).
>>I am fine with option 2, to publish a new Working Draft and then publish
>> a
>>second  last Call in a few  months.
>>
>>Sorry for my previous emails, my emailer went wrong and sent multiple
>> message
>>Sorry for the buzz.
>>
>>--
>>Thierry Michel
>>W3C
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Thierry Michel
W3C
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 18:16:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 January 2009 18:16:35 GMT