W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: Last Call Comments Process

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 18:36:17 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b30ba64ba74deff@[10.0.100.86]>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>At 11:45 03/02/2003 -0600, pat hayes wrote:
>>>Pat,
>>>
>>>Now we are in last call, we have to be a bit more disciplined 
>>>about handling comments.
>>
>>OK, sorry I was too fast with the comments.
>
>Speed I like.
>
>>  Im now back fully connected, WHAT a relief!!
>
>You and me both.  My relief's bigger than yours :)
>
>>>  We discussed the process for handling last call comments on 
>>>Friday's telecon.  To some extent we are figuring it out as we go 
>>>along, but here is the gist of what I have in mind:
>>>
>>>   o comment arrives in www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>>>   o if its an "immediate response" e.g. "we say that in section 
>>>xx.yy" then the editor responds pointing this out and hopefully 
>>>the commentor agrees and that's all very lightweight.
>>
>>OK. I can send immediate responses to the following, with your go-ahead:
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0179.html
>
>You don't need my goahead.  But remember the goal on rdf comments is 
>not to have a technical argument.  Its to clarify whether there is 
>an issue, what it is and how significant it is.  We've got two folks 
>saying "I don't like what you've done with the semantics of rdf:Bag."
>
>Do we think they have misunderstood what we have done?  In this 
>case, I don't think so.

I think they do to some extent. I can explain why in a longer message 
which might be generally helpful in any case, as this issue has come 
up before in other emails, eg from that lady (forget her name) who 
was writing an RDF book,and probably will again.

>  We can explain the reasons for the choice we made and they may 
>accept them, or not be convinced.  What is perhaps most important 
>here is to understand the significance of the issue to Ossi and 
>Massimo.  Why do they care?  What breaks for them?  Is this a 
>comment along the lines of "I would do it differently" or do they 
>have a billion dollar software business that will go down the tubes 
>as a result of this decision.
>
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0159.html
>
>Yup
>
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0125.html
>
>Those are comments primer and concepts, though with some quotes from 
>*emails* of yours.  Do those editors need help with these comments. 
>I think its a bit out of line for there to be last call comments 
>about your emails.  Maybe I should make a process about to Bob about 
>reviewing the docs, not anything else?

The trouble is that Bob cites emails from me to make his case against 
the Primer text, but he misunderstands the point I was making. I was 
going to point this out to him, but I can do it off-list if you 
prefer.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Monday, 3 February 2003 19:34:37 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:55:47 EDT