- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:23:13 -0700
- To: "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: "'Manu Sporny'" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>, "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
I'd suggest we go ahead and merge 304, as it's a bug fix. This will allow us to get updated reports from implementations soon so that they're in place for Wednesday's vote for transition. I've implemented the fix in my code as well [1]. Gregg Kellogg gregg@greggkellogg.net [1] https://github.com/ruby-rdf/json-ld/commit/49492f4930c048e023c6f47364848a057a63f99a On Oct 21, 2013, at 10:06 AM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > On Monday, October 21, 2013 11:29 AM, Manu Sporny wrote: >> We need to discuss moving the PR forward again as well as a couple of >> issues that have come up in the mean time. Unfortunately, I've been so >> swamped with travelling as of late that it's been very difficult for me >> to get around to the official responses that we need to have done to >> move to PR. I'll try to get them done before the call tomorrow night. >> > [...] >> >> 1. Bug in @reverse algorithm >> 2. Advance to Proposed Recommendation > > It would be great if everyone could have a look at the following two PR before tomorrow's telecon: > > https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/pull/303 > https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/pull/304 > > Those are the necessary changes to the API spec. They should be rather uncontroversial but I didn't want to merge them before getting a few more eyes on them. > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > >
Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 17:23:45 UTC