- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Sat, 01 May 2010 10:54:40 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
This is great! I just wish there were a better mechanism that would enforce the workflow. In the XHTML 2 working group we used a customized issue tracker that helped us ensure each issue went through each step. And, as a side benefit, had a script that automatically generated the DoC from the database. Ivan Herman wrote: > I have set up a wiki page for official comments: > > http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/Comments > > we are under obligation to give official answer to those and seek consensus from the commenter and, at the end of our working group life we will have to show that this has been done properly (the w3c jargon is 'disposition of comments'). So better set up the process while we have only a few of those. Note that the page is for comments coming from outside of the working group only. > > The proposed way of action (that we have followed at other places) is that somebody volunteers (or is volunteered:-) to draft an answer to the comment on a separate wiki page, announces it to the group, the group can say yay or nay, and the the answer is officially sent back to the commenter. > > To make things easier I stole a template from the OWL WG: > > http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/Template:Creply > > and I created an example of usage at > > http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/AnswerToComment_Example > > I hope this is o.k. with everybody > > Thanks, > > Ivan > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Saturday, 1 May 2010 15:55:18 UTC