W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org > November 2016

Re: Call to action

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:01:45 +1000
To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <b7189457-f6ea-d25c-946f-2d3bf71c3a44@topquadrant.com>
Each wiki page has a History button in the top:

https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/index.php?title=Proposals&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outdated, so I had moved most issues down to the Resolved part, and then 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2016 22:02:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 29 November 2016 22:02:26 UTC