- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:18:39 +1000
- To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
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 >
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2016 05:19:20 UTC