W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2008

Re: request for extension to review RDFa Last Call.

From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:24:47 -0400
Message-Id: <B32A684E-FCCD-4995-9B68-AF178DED6B28@IEEE.org>
Cc: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>, zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, wai-liaison@w3.org, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>

Let's try it this way:

Gottfried,

Why don't you make your target to file your comments directly
without prior PFWG review to <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
by 4 April.

Ben,

If any of Gottfried's questions raise in the Task Force
mind a question of "is this really necessary for accessibility?"
then I suggest a dialog with PFWG on the issue before
the RDFa Task Force goes to consensus on a disposition.

Shane,

Yes, if we were on time, we would prefer to filter the
comments through the Group.  But in fact we are here
imposing on our friends for extra time; and I think
Ben and I should implement a process that saves RDFa as much
calendar overtime as possible while still enabling a review.

Al


On 28 Mar 2008, at 5:37 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>
> Well - the W3C process on this is pretty clear.  If a working group  
> wishes to submit last call comments as a working group position,  
> then the working group needs to approve them.  Of course any  
> individual is free to submit any comments they want.  But I assume  
> Gottfried has been tasked by the PFWG to draft a working group  
> position, so they need to approve it.
> Mark Birbeck wrote:
>> Hi Gottfried, Al and Ben,
>>
>> Great to hear that Gottfried is able to provide a review.
>>
>>
>>>  I think i will have something by April 4, but i may not make it  
>>> to the PF
>>>  call on April 2.  So PF might need until April 9 to review my  
>>> comments and
>>>  commit to a agreed version of them.
>>>
>>
>> Speaking as someone who is not very good on the minutiae of W3C
>> process, that does sound like an unnecessary formality. After all, Al
>> began this thread by saying that the group had only just found a
>> reviewer, and with respect to the rest of the group, aren't
>> Gottfried's comments going to be most considered...so to speak?
>>
>> So why can't we just accept all of Gottfried's comments for  
>> consideration?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
> Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
> ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 28 March 2008 22:25:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:56 UTC