Re: public-comments email problem

+1

-Annette


On 7/19/18 12:32 AM, david.browning@thomsonreuters.com wrote:
>
> +1 – a good idea
>
> · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 
> · · · ·
> *David Browning*
> Platform Technology Architect
>
> *Thomson Reuters*
>
> Phone: +41(058) 3065054
> Mobile: +41(079) 8126123
>
> david.browning@thomsonreuters.com 
> <mailto:david.browning@thomsonreuters.com>
> thomsonreuters.com <http://thomsonreuters.com/>
>
>
>
> *From:*andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu [mailto:andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu]
> *Sent:* 19 July 2018 07:29
> *To:* rob@metalinkage.com.au; kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> *Cc:* public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: public-comments email problem
>
> +1
>
> Andrea
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 19, 2018 01:32
> *To:* kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> *Cc:* public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: public-comments email problem
>
> +1
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 at 04:34 Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net 
> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>
>     Dave R contacted the W3C email maven (Gerald Oskoboiny) about the
>     problems we've been having with the public-comments list rejecting
>     some
>     emails. It turns out that the way the permissions were set it only
>     allowed posting by folks who were already on some (any) W3C email
>     list.
>     This means that many DCAT community people would not have
>     permission to
>     post.
>
>     This has been corrected. At this time anyone should be able to post to
>     the comments list. We are asking for any information about logs that
>     could alert us to other rejected emails.
>
>     Simon asked if this means that we need to re-do our call for comments.
>     In the past we've done a follow-up call and that might be useful
>     at this
>     time. A follow-up could remind folks that a second draft is coming
>     (can
>     we give a ballpark date, like "fall 2018"?) and that comments received
>     now could potentially be addressed in that draft. That provides both a
>     reason for the follow-up and an incentive to reply promptly.
>
>     Let us know what you think.
>     -- 
>     Karen Coyle
>     kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>     <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__kcoyle.net&d=DwMFAg&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=SX6sxEGBIuiEtjQTAWz7jTpuOC0f5DcH79errOWxM8RN6gOsHdAxWfl9GTTkalJj&m=jcWHudA--1IE_AoyRkmD_ivBzMqQI6cpNwuN_M6DFuY&s=PYlffWnlb_p0UzjeFe-iGh4JLIf3E694OXX8IkB7Reg&e=>
>     m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)
>     skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 <tel:+1%20510-984-3600>
>

-- 
Annette Greiner
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory