Re: Call to action

I have been a bit slow responding to this call.  I tried to join a meeting
last week, but my calendar had the wrong information in it.

I intend to show up on Wednesday to see what I can do to move the CR
forward.   I will be traveling, so I will be voice-only for a big part of
the meeting, but I will be on the IRC as well at the start.


Dean


On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
wrote:

> Each wiki page has a History button in the top:
>
> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/index.php?title=Pro
> posals&action=history
>
> On this occasion almost every proposal is new. The page was previously
> outdated, so I had moved most issues down to the Resolved part, and then I
> added all new tickets.
>
> HTH
> Holger
>
>
>
> On 30/11/2016 2:07, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
>> Could someone say which ones were added? There's nothing to indicate the
>> new ones.
>>
>> kc
>>
>> On 11/29/16 6:58 AM, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
>>
>>> I thought Holger's effort to review the proposals wiki page to try and
>>> resolve some of the remaining issues was a positive move but I note that
>>> only Dimitris responded to Holger's call to action.
>>>
>>> I can only encourage other WG members to take the time to go through
>>> that page and cast their votes. These can be a very useful indication of
>>> where the WG stands.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> --
>>> Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web & Blockchain
>>> Technologies - IBM Cloud
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From:        Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
>>> To:        "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
>>> Date:        11/24/2016 06:19 AM
>>> Subject:        Re: Call to action
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24/11/2016 9:05, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>
>>>> For those who were not attending yesterday's meeting: only 5 people
>>>> attended and we made very little measurable progress. Instead of
>>>> closing issues, we now have 25 open issues. Clearly, on this pace we
>>>> will not be able to reach CR status this year and will likely require
>>>> an extension of the working group until the end of 2017. It is not
>>>> clear that we would be granted such an extension, so we currently risk
>>>> complete failure.
>>>>
>>>> To reach CR status we need to demonstrate that we have few open
>>>> tickets, and be responsive to input from the outside. I am trying my
>>>> best to catch up with the many comments, and Karen is helping
>>>> organizing them. Yet the flood of open tickets makes the state of the
>>>> spec look much worse than it really is. Instead of giving up on this
>>>> flood, I believe we can do better. This requires that more WG members
>>>> show up to meetings, and be better prepared for these meetings. Arnaud
>>>> suggested we need more specific proposals to expedite the process.
>>>>
>>>> I have revived our old PROPOSALS page
>>>>
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Proposals#Open_Issues
>>>>
>>>> and added specific proposals for 17 of the 25 open issues.
>>>>
>>>
>>> A few hours later there are now specific proposals to close 23 of the 25
>>> open issues. The only 2 remaining ones are about the SPARQL pre-binding
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> Please take a look and help us make progress.
>>>
>>> Holger
>>>
>>>
>>> I believe many of these are already addressed and could be closed
>>>> swiftly. But this requires that people take the time to read through
>>>> the proposals and ask for clarifications in emails etc. The weekly
>>>> meetings are clearly not sufficient to address all these tickets if we
>>>> continue to get bogged down with lengthy discussions and need to
>>>> explain things over and over again.
>>>>
>>>> Please everyone vote on the page above, if you can. Better invest time
>>>> now than having to sit through another half year of SHACL WG meetings.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Holger
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>