W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Status of TAG work on Publishing and Linking on the Web

From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 06:42:10 -0700
Message-ID: <4E58F432.8060407@oracle.com>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:39 GMT