Plan for merging documents

I am proposing a plan for merging the two default merging documents as
apparently there has been some confusion between the various editors.

1) There is one default mapping document, it's URI is [1]:

2) That Eric attempt his best to merge this doc [1] with the other
document [2] till the end of today.

3) Friday through Sunday, Juan and Marcelo be given editorial control of
the doc [1].

4) If the editors feel they do not have agreement on either the text or
the semantic notation, then they keep it as sections. I.e. there be the
following sections on doc [1]:

Section 2: Original Examples and Text, what is originally in [1].
Section 2: Alternate Examples and Text, from [2].
Section 3: Original Semantic Notation, from Section 3-5 of [1].
Section 4: Datalog Semantic Notation, from wiki I assume.
Section 5: Relational Algebra Semantic Notation (from Soeren's note -
Soeren, is this possible?)

If possible, editors should mark which parts have consensus.

Then the WG inspect on Tuesday Nov 9th. Ideally, people should have Monday
to look at documents before telecon on Tuesday.

Each person in proponent of a particular approach should clearly explain
what use-case/example the their notation handles that the other notation
cannot via e-mail on Monday before the telecon, ideally with reference to 
the "by-then-merged" document [1]. Aesthetic matters should not be
discussed as technical points, although the WG can of course take
aesthetic matters into concern in approaches are otherwise equal.

  cheers,
        harry

[1]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directGraph/
[2]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directGraph/alt

\>>   Guys, I'm confused with all this mail.
>> What exactly is our plan for the default mapping document?
>
> The plan is to have a single default map document, with open issues (both
> around formal notation, and now I guess struture), for the WG to review
> for FPWD by Nov 9th.
>
> I have confidence in all the editors of this document (Eric, Marcelo,
> Juan), although I am under confusion of what the URI of this proposed
> document may be.
>
>> --
>> All the best, Ashok
>>
>>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 14:28:15 UTC