Re: Editor/spec status check and April 8th call?

Hi - can anyone confirm if we’re meeting at 15:00 GMT (UTC) or 15:00 BST? Many thanks, Jeremy


> On 7 Apr 2015, at 20:51, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi - I'll be dialling for tomorrow's call ... back from vacation :-) 
> 
> I have two outstanding issues [1][2] assigned to me that I should get resolved tomorrow. Nothing major - so 16th April looks good.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> [1]: https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/445 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/445> 
> [2]: https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/459 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/459>
> 
> On 7 April 2015 at 15:05, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
> Dan,
> 
> as far as I am concerned, all the issues I raised during my review are closed. Ie, if we can handle, both decision wise and editorially, Jeni's comments tomorrow, I am o.k. to publish next week.
> 
> Ivan
> 
> > On 07 Apr 2015, at 15:36 , Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com <mailto:danbri@google.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Last week Ivan, Gregg and I had an informal call.
> >
> > Super brief IRC log here, http://www.w3.org/2015/04/01-csvw-irc <http://www.w3.org/2015/04/01-csvw-irc>
> >
> > We talked somewhat more than scribed, but the main point of record was
> > made by Ivan:
> >
> > "we have to be a little more administrative (final reviews etc) in
> > coming period.
> > coming back next week, we might be ready to have a publication on the
> > following tuesday.
> > … aiming at 16th April currently. unless Jeremy or Jeni hits a major
> > issue, it should be doable."
> >
> > Jeni/Jeremy, how are things looking editorially from your side?
> >
> > Those of us who are around - let's have a call tomorrow.
> >
> > Checking in on Github, I see 5 items from Jeni listed as requiring
> > teleconf attention (and none from anyone else):
> >
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Requires+telcon+discussion%2Fdecision%22 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Requires+telcon+discussion%2Fdecision%22>
> >
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/444 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/444> "Should tables have a schema annotation?"
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/445 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/445> "Row annotations in conversion
> > specifications"
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/446 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/446> "Inherited property annotations
> > on columns"
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/448 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/448> "Is specifying default metadata
> > necessary?"
> > https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/449 <https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/449> "HTTP headers vs dialects"
> >
> > All of these have had some discussion in Github. Assuming we manage to
> > reach a resolution on each before or during tomorrow's call, does
> > publishing on April 16th still sound feasible? Other editors - can you
> > confirm that you have no further issues requiring teleconf discussion?
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > (around tomorrow, happy to chair)
> >
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153 <tel:%2B31-641044153>
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>