RE: Which mailing list to use for UC&R comments?

Thanks for the clarification. I clearly skipped over the generated text
and missed the feedback address.
I'm happy to monitor for UC&R comments for this draft.
 I guess the next draft of UC&R will be the final call (Arnaud - do you
have a schedule in mind?) and I'll revise the feedback address for that.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandro Hawke []
Sent: 04 November 2013 19:09
To: Steve Battle;
Subject: Re: Which mailing list to use for UC&R comments?

On 11/04/2013 11:36 AM, Steve Battle wrote:
> A process question: Are we asking people to comment on LDP UC&R at
> public-ldp or public-ldp-comments (or both informal/formal?). Or is
> public-ldp-comments just for last call?
> None of the publication announcements I've seen mention a list.
> Steve

The document itself needs to provide a feedback address, according to
pubrules, and it does.   Unfortunately, it says
That's not what I would have chosen, since it makes it harder to track
the comments.   But not that much harder, since the traffic on that list
is low.    Also, we're not formally obligated to respond to all comments
since it's not Rec Track, but we still should.

     - s

> --
> Steve Battle
> Semantic Engineer
> Mobile: +44 (0)7503 624 613
> Landline: +44 (0)1173 709 678
> E-mail:
> Web:
> Sysemia Limited
> The Innovation Centre, Bristol & Bath Science Park, Dirac Crescent,
> Emerson's Green, Bristol BS16 7FR Registered in England and Wales.
> Company
> Number: 7555456
> Information contained in this e-mail is intended for the use of the
> addressee only, and is confidential and may also be privileged. If you
> receive this message in error, please advise us immediately. If you
> are not the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of
> distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information
> in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Attachments to this
> e-mail may contain software viruses which may damage your systems.
> Sysemia Ltd have taken reasonable steps to minimise this risk, but we
> advise that any attachments are virus checked before they are opened.

Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2013 10:23:38 UTC