Re: ISSUE-58: PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral value for strings [RDFa 1.1 API]

Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 10/28/2010 02:51 PM, Nathan wrote:
>> okay we all agree, great.
>> Issue closed as void.
> Yikes! Don't close issues in the ISSUE tracker without a PROPOSAL to the
> mailing list followed by no objections to the given proposal.
> The issue wasn't void - we needed to have that discussion and record the
> outcome of the discussion in a formal way. At a minimum, Mark hasn't had
> a chance to chime in yet and neither has the public. Just because you
> raised the issue and feel that it has been dealt with doesn't mean that
> it's dealt with. :)
> In general, once an issue is in the ISSUE tracker, we have to go through
> the process and address the issue as a Working Group. Just because the
> majority of people in the RDFa WG agree that this is the right direction
> doesn't mean that the general public doesn't know something that could
> affect that direction.
> At a minimum, we should give people a PROPOSAL and a minimum of 7 days
> to send in objections before closing ISSUEs.

Apologies! I thought it could go from a status of "RAISED" to "CLOSED" 
without worry, as in "NOT AN ISSUE" - whereas if it was OPEN then it 
would have to go through the full procedure.

Shall I change it's status back to "RAISED", and as for all these 
issues, should they be RAISED or OPEN or other?



Received on Thursday, 28 October 2010 19:16:01 UTC