- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:46:30 -0400
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- CC: 'W3C RDF WG' <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 04/04/2013 04:40 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote: > On Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:23 PM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > >> Yeah, I guess.... My hesitation is that I think abstracts should >> be talking about the spec, not making claims about the world, such as >> how often and how well these transforms simplify things -- claims >> someone could potentially disagree with. >> >> But I'm really nitpicking; it's okay. >> >> And everything else, below, is fine. > Great. > > >> So it's just the idlharness thing now? > Yeah.. The only other thing I'm aware of is the link to the test suite. > Currently it points to http://json-ld.org/test-suite/. Shall I change that > to http://www.w3.org/2013/json-ld-tests/ as we've discussed? I just checked. > It's not setup yet. > > >> You might try generating some WDs now, and seeing how they fare on >> pubrules. > I will do that tomorrow. What date shall I use? April 11? In last week's > telecon we didn't really discuss whether we plan to skip CR, shall I add a > sentence like (adapted from SPARQL): > > The Working Group welcomes reports of implementations, sent to the comments > address. If we gather sufficient evidence of interoperable implementations, > the group may request to skip Call for Implementations (Candidate > Recommendation) drafts and have the next round of publications be Proposed > Recommendations. > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > >
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2013 21:46:37 UTC