Re: call for review, and tracking comments

afaik, there's a new (2017?) process that started recently. maybe one has to explicitly refer to the now "old" 2015 process?
simon

-------- Original message --------
From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> 
Date: 3/3/17  13:12  (GMT+01:00) 
To: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> 
Cc: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org 
Subject: Re: call for review, and tracking comments 

I'm not sure, but I think this might be the answer:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2016AprJun/0069.html

I'll keep trying to figure this out, but figured I'd give you this 
pointer, so maybe you can be looking in parallel.

   -- Sandro

On 03/03/2017 01:28 AM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Hi Sandro,
>
> I have included the suggested prose into the status of the document in 
> bold.
>
> I have just triggered ECHIDNA but it (once more) resulted in a 
> failure. This is a new error though that I have not see before:
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tr-notifications/2017Mar/0017.html 
>
>
> "Only documents published under the 2015 process are supported at the 
> moment"
>
> Is this something you have seen before or know how to resolve? I am 
> not aware of recent changes that could cause this.
>
> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>
> On 3/03/2017 2:47, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> Suggested plan:
>>
>> * When we publish the new draft tomorrow and ask for review, we 
>> should include a prominent alert that:
>>
>> (1) we are on a very short timeline and need comments by March 17th 
>> at the latest.
>> (2) if you need more time than that, let us know what you need
>> (3) if you've made earlier comments that you don't consider as having 
>> been addressed, please tell us again
>> (4) we're especially interested in plans to implement
>>
>>
>> * Moving forward we track comments carefully.   I kinda of like 
>> telling folks to use github, but we can stick with email + tracker + 
>> wiki.
>>
>> Sound okay?   If we get a flood of interest, hopefully that will be 
>> taken as an encouraging sign we can use to negotiate a little more 
>> time on the CR transition deadline.
>>
>>    -- Sandro
>>
>>
>
>