- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:46:24 +0000
- To: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com>
- Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 10 Mar 2011, at 20:58, David Wood wrote: > [[ > 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. > ]] Thanks. That makes sense. > 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. My opinion is that both questions should be answered with a “No.” I also think they're both in scope and deserve further discussion. Best, Richard > > 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 22:46:59 UTC