So for now we should track progress at:
http://ld-specs.github.io/ld-patch/ and we'll be informed when that
location changes, correct?
I have a couple interested parties who'd like to be current on what is
going on and don't want them reading the wrong thing.
Thanks,
- Steve Speicher
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the update, Alexandre.
>
> Although an FPWD doesn't commit the WG to anything, I don't think it's
> reasonable to expect people to read the spec over the weekend and be ready
> to approve its publication on Monday. I would plan on giving WG members at
> least a week to review it.
>
> As for the spec repo, can't we just use mercurial like we have done so far
> for the other specs? I now we've decided to use github for the test suite
> but that's to facilitate download by people outside the WG. There is no
> such need for a spec.
>
> Regards.
> --
> Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
>
>
> bertails@gmail.com wrote on 05/01/2014 01:56:34 PM:
>
> > From: Alexandre Bertails <alexandre@bertails.org>
> > To: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS, public-ldp-wg@w3.org,
> > Cc: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>,
> > Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com>
> > Date: 05/01/2014 01:57 PM
> > Subject: LD Patch progress
> > Sent by: bertails@gmail.com
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just wanted to give some update to the group about LD Patch.
> > Pierre-Antoine, Andrei and I have been meeting a few times since the
> > F2F and we have settled on the exact scope for LD Patch, including the
> > syntax and the operational semantics.
> >
> > Our plan is to prepare a draft by the end of next week so that the
> > group can decide on May 12th to publish the FPWD so that we can start
> > gathering feedback.
> >
> > Also, it would be nice if a team contact could create a ldpatch-spec
> > repository under the w3c organization at GitHub. And then give us
> > control. Thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Alexandre
> >
>