Re: 1st draft on primer ignorable

So shall I send the revised proposal to the TC list, and allow  
comment from work group? Perhaps I should send as my proposal, rather  
than from Editors?

My concern is making effective use of the F2F time.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia


On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:37 PM, ext Prasad Yendluri wrote:

> Hi Frederick,
>
> I think what Asir is concerned about is that we have an open issue
> (http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4041) and AI on the  
> editors
> to get back to the WG with a proposal
> (http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/172). We (editors)
> generally incorporate the changes after the WG's formal approval  
> when there
> is a directly related issue open. We do not incorporate the  
> proposed changes
> into the checked in versions. Your proposal is pretty good and I  
> think it
> would just go through quickly on the next WG call if we can send it  
> to the
> WG by tomorrow.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Prasad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick  
> Hirsch
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:15 AM
> To: ext Asir Vedamuthu
> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; ext Prasad Yendluri; WS-Policy Editors W3C
> Subject: Re: 1st draft on primer ignorable
>
>
> I do not understand why we cannot show progress to date to the TC
> unless there is a serious issue.
>
> regards, Frederick
>
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:51 AM, ext Asir Vedamuthu wrote:
>
>>> If we agree on doing this then I will make the
>>> changes and this can
>>> be included in the red-line Asir generates.
>>
>> This is not the current practice. Can't think of a reason why this
>> proposal needs to be rushed in. BTW, this is the second time we are
>> discussing this process question (we discussed a similar process
>> question in the last week of Nov 06).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Asir S Vedamuthu
>> Microsoft Corporation
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick
>> Hirsch
>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 12:51 PM
>> To: ext Prasad Yendluri
>> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; WS-Policy Editors W3C
>> Subject: Re: 1st draft on primer ignorable
>>
>>
>> Prasad
>>
>> Thanks for the helpful review, I agree with all your changes and
>> suggest we remove the line
>> " Providers should not lie and the Ignorable marker allows them to be
>> truthful."
>>
>> I propose we include these changes in the red-line set of documents
>> we provide the committee. This lets the  committee see it (as a
>> DRAFT) at the F2F and possibly provide constructive feedback.
>>
>> I understand there was an issue raised by Ashok but believe there was
>> strong committee agreement to keep ignorable as we agreed. Thus it
>> would make sense to have this text in place. I can remove it if we
>> have to.
>>
>> If we agree on doing this then I will make the changes and this can
>> be included in the red-line Asir generates.
>>
>> Please let me know so I can do this in a timely manner. Asir, does
>> this make sense to you?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> regards, Frederick
>>
>> Frederick Hirsch
>> Nokia
>>
>>
>> On Jan 5, 2007, at 1:49 PM, ext Prasad Yendluri wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Frederick,
>>>
>>> Thanks for doing this. Looks pretty complete to me.
>>> I have attached a marked up copy with a few of my comments /
>>> suggested
>>> changes.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> Prasad
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
>>> [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick
>>> Hirsch
>>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 6:56 AM
>>> To: WS-Policy Editors W3C
>>> Cc: Hirsch Frederick
>>> Subject: 1st draft on primer ignorable
>>>
>>> Attached is 1st draft on adding ignorable to primer. I think we can
>>> do this simply by adding two new sections as noted.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you think I should add it in today to get it
>>> into the draft for the F2F, or if you have any other suggestion or
>>> comment.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> regards, Frederick
>>>
>>> Frederick Hirsch
>>> Nokia
>>>
>>>
>>> <ignorable-proposal-PY.doc>
>>
>>
>

Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 18:01:41 UTC