- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:46:14 +0100
- To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
- Cc: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <3539FFCE-B177-4AE1-B977-96B048E50332@w3.org>
> On 11 Dec 2014, at 09:42 , Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ivan, Jeni - I happily agree with you both regarding timescales. My intent is to complete the updates to both JSON and RDF mapping documents asap (which I anticipate will be early next week). Once done, I will update the github w3c/csvw:gh-pages repo and notify the WG. The current Editor’s Draft version of the JSON doc is partially updated; the RDF one not updated at all. O.k. Let us do it this way. We can get then the approval of the WG next week (hopefully!), I can start the procedure with Ralph; actually, I can also make a publishing ready version myself with respec. The actual publishing would then happen sometimes early January. Ivan > > Jeremy > >> On 10 Dec 2014, at 15:37, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote: >> >> Jeremy, >> >> Following up on this: I agree that we shouldn’t kill ourselves trying to get this out before Xmas, but we should aim to publish very early in January. >> >> Is the document at http://w3c.github.io/csvw/csv2json/ the one that you want published? If so, we will take a vote on it next week. If not, please could you update to the latest version. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jeni >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> >> Reply: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>> >> Date: 10 December 2014 at 08:11:23 >> To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>> >> Cc: W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>> >> Subject: Re: regrets for anticipated teleconf 11-Dec-2014 (tomorrow) >> >>> Jeremy et al, >>> >>> I try to put my staff-contact hat on... >>> >>> To get these documents published as FPWD, we need: >>> >>> 1. a formal vote of the WG to move ahead >>> 2. a request from Ralph Swick to approve the publication, more exactly to approve the >>> 'short name' (that is necessary for a FPWD only, subsequent publications may skip this) >>> 3. get the document through the hurdles of the pubrules' checker, including installing >>> the document on the W3C site, get it through respec, etc. >>> 4. get it on the calendar of the webmaster who would publish the document. This should >>> be done 1-2 days minimum before the targeted publication date >>> >>> Publications occur on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the last available date before XMas >>> is the 18th, ie, next week Thursday. >>> >>> I wonder whether it is worth the trouble to push this through in high speed, and whether >>> it is realistic. Even if we do #1 through email, that takes 1-2 days, we cannot expect people >>> to be on line all the time. Although part of #2-#4 can be done in parallel, those also take >>> time. >>> >>> So... I wonder whether it is not more realistic to aim at, say, #1 and #3 be done before Xmas, >>> maybe issue the request to Ralph (#2), but aim at a very early January publication. Actually, >>> the best would be if we could do that together with a republication of the metadata and >>> syntax documents, too (those two do not need #2, and even #1 is much looser). >>> >>> Ivan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 09 Dec 2014, at 17:17 , Jeremy Tandy wrote: >>>> >>>> All - although I haven’t seen an agenda for a meeting tomorrow (11-Dec) I anticipate >>> that there will be one. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately I will not be able to participate due to other commitments. >>>> >>>> As of right now, I have done a significant edit on the JSON mapping document; I am working >>> in my local repo and will do a pull request soon (hopefully today) to get my changes in to >>> w3c/csvw:gh-pages. It may not be finished, but we’re getting there. I expect the RDF >>> mapping doc to be broadly similar. I have worked through all the issues, meeting minutes >>> and draft documents and have drafted what needs to go into both documents … it just needs >>> to be HTML-ified (and converted into ‘proper’ English with a logical structure!). >>>> >>>> I know that we’re still aiming for FPWD on these two docs _before Christmas_. The last >>> date is 19-Dec, so I would hope to have a vote next week (or by email correspondence) to >>> publish FPWD. >>>> >>>> There are a bunch of issues in the [GitHub repo][1] to discuss. But here’s a short list >>> of the ones that I’d really like some feedback on if you have time to discuss: >>>> >>>> - Are the abstract tabular data and the CSV that encodes it the same thing? [#93] >>>> - Making `schema` property mandatory for table description objects & explicit identification >>> of schemas [#94] >>>> >>>> Many thanks, Jeremy >>>> >>>> [1]:https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> ---- >>> Ivan Herman, W3C >>> Digital Publishing Activity Lead >>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Jeni Tennison >> http://www.jenitennison.com/ > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2014 09:46:45 UTC