W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > September 2016

Re: comment about SHACL Status of This Document

From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 20:43:05 +0200
To: Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com>
Cc: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF7CFF99F3.A74F4081-ONC125803C.0065A6A4-C125803C.0066D03D@notes.na.collabserv.com>
Point taken. I'll try to make sure the next draft addresses that point.

Incidentally, to answer your question, I can tell you that I expect at 
least one more WD to be published before we get to CR, very possibly more.

Furthermore, among other things, until we have all issues closed we cannot 
contemplate moving to CR. You can check the status on that front by a 
simple look to tracker: 
https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/open


While Last Call was dropped from the Recommendation track, the requirement 
for "wide review" wasn't. It is recognized as a rather fuzzy requirement 
but you can expect a clear signal to this list and others when we think 
we're about done.

Thank you for pointing out the missing piece in our SOTD.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web Technologies - 
IBM Cloud




From:   Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com>
To:     public-rdf-shapes@w3.org
Date:   09/28/2016 08:28 PM
Subject:        comment about SHACL Status of This Document



This is a formal comment on:
https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-shacl-20160814/#sotd


I would like to review the Shapes Constraint Language as the Working Group 
draws towards having a completed document.

Mistakenly, I was waiting for a Last Call.

In lieu of a last call, the 2015 process doc, requires:
https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#general-requirements


Every document published as part of the technical report development 
process
[…] must include information about the status of the document. This status 
information
[…]
must include expectations about next steps,

In the SOTD of the August 14 publication, no such expectations are set.
In particular, I would welcome information about whether the WG hopes that 
the next step will be to advance to CR, or whether the next step will be a 
further WD.

Thank you

Jeremy J. Carroll
(personal capacity)






Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2016 18:43:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:44 UTC