- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:49:06 -0400
- To: Public GLD WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
As per today's decision, I spoke to Ralph Swick (acting as W3C Director)
about the owl-time dependency. By sheer luck (I'm not kidding), Phil,
Hadley, Bernadette, and Thomas Roessler were on the call as well.
Ralph isn't prepared to make an exception of the size we're asking
without taking more time to gather input, so we came up with a tactic
for postponing the decision: put the normative reference At Risk. This
is also asking for input from the community on whether the strict
linkage to owl-time is good or bad, and how stable owl-time is
considered to be.
It would be very good to publish the CR drafts on Tuesday (because I'm
hoping our extension request will be considered Wednesday), so Dave, do
you think you can make this change to the document by Monday morning?
If not, I think I can do it.
And everyone else, is this okay? If there are no -1's (formal
objections) by mid-Monday, I'll ask the chairs to confirm this is a
group resolution.
-- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 18:49:17 UTC