Re: Agenda TC 2010-09-13

I'd assume we have to go through the normal "cycle" if we want to include this in the Rec track docs, i.e. start with FPWD, etc.
any comments from the team contacts?

FWIW, as I had understood it, we had at least one WD cycle with ideally all missing pieces added before LC planned anyways, cf.
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-10#document_publishing_status__2f_plans

Axel

On 14 Sep 2010, at 12:03, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> 
> 
> On 14/09/10 11:35, Axel Polleres wrote:
> > Thanks for pointing to the overview document... will add this to be discussed, though we still need to get it in format (it is only on the wiki for the moment)
> >
> > Axel
> 
> For this, and for function library, I'm not clear if a WG can, or it's
> normal that, a doc goes straight to LC for them, without a WD cycle.
> (e.g. call for exclusions)
> 
>         Andy
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 11:24:13 UTC