- From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 06:42:10 -0700
- To: www-tag@w3.org
On the last telcon Henry suggested that this material be published in some public medium. I suggest a NY Times OpEd piece under Tim's byline. If people agree I can try and help with the writing, now that Client-Side State is pretty much done. All the best, Ashok On 8/27/2011 2:35 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote: > Noah, > > Our discussion of that draft at the F2F preceded our later discussion about priorities. Based on that later discussion, since the last F2F I have prioritised work on microdata/RDFa and fragment identifiers and mime types, and I'm afraid I haven't made progress on this work as a consequence. > > From what I recall of the F2F discussion, Dan had some good ideas about who might be able to provide some legal review... > > Jeni > > On 27 Aug 2011, at 04:25, Noah Mendelsohn wrote: > >> Jeni and Dan, >> >> In preparation for the Sept. F2F, I've been looking at our work on Publishing and Linking on the Web [1]. Please verify that this reconstruction of the "state of play" is correct, and suggest next steps. >> >> The latest draft of a report [2] has a date of 8 June 2011, which was the last day of our F2F meeting, and as best I can tell, it's not significantly different than the 28 May Draft [3] that we reviewed at the F2F (log of discussion at [4]). >> >> Crucially, at the end of the discussion it was noted: >> >>> dka: we need a live legal review, don't think we can do it just by> sending the document out >>> goal is to get legal feedback before next F2F >> The pertinent action appears to be ACTION-541, and I note that on 23 June Jeni bumped the due date on that to 26 July. >> >> We did mention this briefly on 11 August [5], and Henry at that time said: >> >>> HT: We need to do something that gets into the public media >> Probably I should have been tracking all this a bit more closely, but I doubt we've moved on the legal review yet. Would it be possible to: >> >> 1) within the next few days, at least try to get some proposals together for who would do the review, with respect to what specific questions& concerns, and when the review might be done? >> >> 2) Consider whether it makes sense to further review [1] ahead of the F2F, or whether we should put it off? It's such good substantial work that I hate to lose a F2F review cycle on it, but worse would be spending time if there's nothing new to do. >> >> Also: I'm concerned that with the microdata/RDFa work, Jeni is spread thin. If we should be bringing someone else up to speed on this, let's think about it ahead of the F2F if possible. >> >> Any suggestions on all of this would be much appreciated. Thank you. >> >> Noah >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/products/PublishingLinking.html >> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/publishingAndLinkingOnTheWeb >> [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/publishingAndLinkingOnTheWeb-2011-05-28 >> [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/06/08-minutes.html#item01 >> [5] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/11-minutes#item04 >> >> >> P.S. Tracker, this relates to ACTION-541. >> >>
Received on Saturday, 27 August 2011 13:43:57 UTC