Publication times (Re: regrets for anticipated teleconf 11-Dec-2014)

Just as an info: the publishing moratorium ends on Monday, 5th of January. Ie, the 6th or the 8th are available. Note that I will leave for a short conference meaning that I will not be around on the 13th. I am back on Wednesday evening so, in theory, the 15th may be possible though I may not be around for the possible preparatory work with the Webmaster.

I think that, if the CSVtoRDF document is available this coming week (15th of December) in same way as the CSVtoJSON, then we can safely go for the 5th of January; I can get the request go out this week and, actually, I can finalize the documents (ie, make them pubrules ready, put them up to the W3C site) before Xmas kicks in. I do not know who far we are with the syntax and the metadata documents.

Ivan




> 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.
> 
> 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