- From: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:58:05 -0500
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On Mar 10, 2011, at 15:02, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Dave, > > On 10 Mar 2011, at 14:40, David Wood wrote: >> There are currently 8 raised issues under the "Cleanup tasks" product at: >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised >> >> We would like to move those issues to "open" status, unless someone objects. > > Process question: What's the consequence of someone objecting? And what's the commitment entailed by opening an issue? Sandro put this very well off-list, so I'll just quote him: [[ The process I've seen is that the chairs mark at issue OPEN if (1) the topic is in scope, something that they believe does need to be discussed and decided in the course of the Group's work, and (2) there isn't an obvious consensus already, ie non-trivial discussion is going to be needed. Opening an issue is essential saying, "this is something we're going to be having on future agendas and discussing on the mailing list until we have a decision." By saying that explicitly, it's lets people relax, knowing that at some point (before Last Call) it will be addressed. ]] I've since opened the "Cleanup tasks" issues, thus implicitly putting them on the agenda for future discussion. Please note that there are two other issues at: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised which are both phrased as questions. I've left those as they are until further discussion clarifies whether they should become open issues. Apologies if that discussion has already occurred; I'm behind on email this week. Regards, Dave > > Richard > > > > >> Could you please take a few minutes to review them and discuss in this thread as needed? Thanks. >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 20:58:41 UTC