- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 22:55:21 +0200
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi, I beg to disagree on this. To me it's perfectly fine to postpone issues, as long as they have been recorded so, as was done for e.g. OWL1: https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html This in fact helps efforts on subsequent versions of standards. E.g. one of the issues postponed in OWL1, qualified restrictions, has been later on addressed in OWL2. For DQV that is currently scheduled to end as a Note, I don't think it should be a problem. Note that I'm not proposing just to make the issue disappear. Fomally postponed issues still appear in the Tracker. In fact they have their own listing at https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/postponed cheers, Antoine On 24/06/16 16:24, Riccardo Albertoni wrote: > Fine with me, I am going to forward my last mail to the list .. so > that you can reply to it in public.. ;) > Have a good weekend! > > Riccardo > > On 24 June 2016 at 15:58, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: >> Hi Riccardo, >> >> This is not right I believe. A group can postpone issues. I've seen things >> becoming standards after having postponed issues. One cannot be expected to >> solve everything - that's also true for standard recs, and of course that's >> even more true for Notes. >> What should happen is that there's no open issues. This is quite different. >> >> Happy to discuss it on the list. Alright? >> >> Antoine >> >> >> On 24/06/16 15:50, Riccardo Albertoni wrote: >>> >>> Hi antoine, >>> Considering the discussion we have had during the call, before you >>> arrived, it seems we have to close the issue and marking it as a >>> postpone issue is not an option.. >>> I am copying part of the minutes you probably are not able to see yet >>> ... >>> >>> <annette_g> riccardoAlbertoni: does anyone know if we can vote on >>> the final version of the DQV even if we postpone the issue? >>> [15:29] <annette_g> hadleybeeman: The answer is no. We need to have >>> all the issues closed and all the actions finished and then be able to >>> take that table with us along with the meeting minutes with us when we >>> meet with the director. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Riccardo >>> >>> On 24 June 2016 at 14:20, Riccardo Albertoni >>> <riccardo.albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Antoine and all, >>>> I like the idea of splitting the issue, keeping separate the >>>> meta-modelling part, which will be marked as postponed. >>>> >>>> Are we allowed to vote and publish the DQV as group note even if we >>>> have formally postponed some "issues" ? >>>> I think the answer should be "yes", but I would prefer to be sure >>>> that this is ok with the W3C rules .. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Riccardo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 June 2016 at 13:16, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> Without the attn to Werner this time... >>>>> >>>>> Our proposal at [1] somehow stops half-way with respect to the general >>>>> problem of Issue-223 [2]. On the one hand, we believe we have a good >>>>> pattern >>>>> for representing parameter values in instance DQV data, and this is a >>>>> reason >>>>> to close Issue-223. On the other hand we don't have a generic framework >>>>> for >>>>> (meta-)modeling parameters properties, and we believe we can't do one >>>>> now, >>>>> which is a reason to postpone Issue-223 and include a note about it in >>>>> the >>>>> new Appendix [3]. >>>>> >>>>> We could also create a new 'break-out' issue about meta-modeling, which >>>>> we >>>>> would postpone, while closing 223. I think for now this would have my >>>>> preference. >>>>> >>>>> Opinions? >>>>> >>>>> Antoine >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2016Jun/0061.html >>>>> [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/223 >>>>> [3] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#Parameters >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> This message has been scanned by E.F.A. Project and is believed to be >>>>> clean. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Riccardo Albertoni >>>> Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico >>>> Magenes" >>>> Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche >>>> via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA >>>> tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660 >>>> e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it >>>> Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/ >>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni >>>> www: http://www.imati.cnr.it/ >>>> http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni >>>> FOAF:http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2016 20:55:58 UTC