Re: Potential WG telecon 2016-12-07

I have to say that I am pretty much of the same mind as Peter, which is 
that in general the spec is not clear, and acting on specific issues 
isn't likely to fix that. The problem is not a word here and there, but 
is more general. I did try to point out some of that, but again it's 
hard to make specific comments about what is a general problem.

I'm going to save my time and skip this meeting. Also, someone else 
needs to record Peter's recent comments. If they aren't recorded, the 
group is not following W3C process.

kc

On 12/3/16 3:00 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Since neither Arnaud nor Eric can make our usual time slot this week,
> Arnaud asked if the remaining WG members would want to have the meeting.
> Given that we are running out of time, I am keen on making progress and
> would try to have a meeting to close further issues. If an official
> chair is needed, I can do that. But this only makes sense if at least 4
> other people are willing to show up. Please respond to this email if you
> would participate, and we'll count votes 24 hours before the actual
> meeting.
>
> ISSUEs that may be uncontroversial enough (see
> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Proposals) are 179, 181, 197,
> 202, 203, 204, 208, 209, 212
>
> Regards,
> Holger
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Monday, 5 December 2016 23:53:03 UTC