Re: Formally addressing issue: rdf compatibility

On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 03:16, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> I read in:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/tr.html#last-call
> 
> that
> "Before advancing a technical report to Last Call Working Draft, the Working
> Group must:
> 
> ...
> formally address all issues raised by Working Group participants, other
> Working Groups, the Membership, and the public about the Working Draft. "
> 
> I note that I raised an issue rdf compatibility in the message:
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0083.html
> 
> I understand "formally address" to mean:
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/groups.html#formal-address
> 
> "In the context of this document, a Working Group has formally addressed an
> issue when the Chair can show (archived) evidence of having sent a response
> to the party who raised the issue. This response should include the Working
> Group's resolution and should ask the party who raised the issue to reply
> with an indication of whether the resolution reverses the initial
> objection."
> 
> I hence ask for a response to my message raising the issue.

Just asking for an issue doesn't make it one. The WG has agreed
that the chairs get to decide what's an issue and what's not.

Er.. oops, no, that's actually not the case. The chairs just
get to decide when to open issues. hmm...

"Issues are submitted by members of the working group. Such issues are
marked raised. The process for submission is described above.
  * The chair may open an issue, normally assigning an owner."
  -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html

Jim, you/we need to go back over all the issue requests
we didn't act on and get them added to the issues list. Sigh.


> Jeremy
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:17:00 UTC