Re: call for review, and tracking comments

Fixed.    Turns out we were hitting some bug in echidna; not something 
we were doing wrong.  I did rewrite the SOTD a bit in the process, 
though (mostly to use bullet points).

Published at https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/

I'll figure out and send out some sort of announcement if no one else 
does / says anything in a few hours.

     -- Sandro


On 03/03/2017 08:08 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> I'm working with the webmaster now to figure this out.  (So please 
> don't try running echidna at this point.)
>
>     -- Sandro
>
> On 03/03/2017 07:12 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Received on Friday, 3 March 2017 14:10:56 UTC