W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Please review: syntactic sugar and polishing (ISSUE-54, ISSUE-56, ISSUE-59, ISSUE-60)

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:55:40 +0100
Cc: W3C RDB2RDF <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5D63594D-0419-4F9D-9BB6-9321686D7AD5@cyganiak.de>
To: David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>
David,

In terms of process, the editors are not obliged to provide an editor's draft at all, nor is there any formal process for approving changes. The responsibility of the editors is simply to ensure that WG decisions are correctly reflected in the document. We would never get anything done if we waited for WG approval before every little change.

As I said, last week's batch of changes is the final one as far as I am concerned. I plan to make further changes only in response to WG decisions and reviewer comments.

The editor's draft is under version control and the four issues are marked PENDING REVIEW. There is a paper trail for what has changed and what needs review.

Best,
Richard


On 29 Aug 2011, at 15:04, David McNeil wrote:

> I have changed the R2RML spec to incorporate four more issues.
> 
> I thought the process for making changes to the spec was to have the working group consider proposals for the changes. Then after the working group accepted a proposal for an item the spec would be changed. I checked the minutes of the recent meeting and tracker and I don't see a record of these changes being approved by the working group. It seems to me that these changes should be rolled back until they are accepted by the working group. Or please, feel free to correct my understanding of how the process is supposed to work.
> 
> -David
Received on Monday, 29 August 2011 14:56:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:26 UTC