- From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:35:55 +0200
- To: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>, Kerry Taylor <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au>
- Cc: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFVDz43EGUoRuVHEoTnUkmBX0Lr26JB7KwvjeJ8mb2yv20HiVA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Ed, Kerry, Today's meeting showed that it is difficult to resolve an issue with a vote in a meeting. It's a pity we did not have time for the second item on the agenda. But still we need to have a way of resolving issues. Could there be other ways of having the group members critically assess a proposed solution at more or less the same time? It seems to me that much of the discussion we have had today could have taken place in the e-mail thread. Maybe there is a way to encourage discussion on a particular issue on the list in a particular time window? Or should there be extra teleconferences? Regards, Frans 2015-06-23 11:56 GMT+02:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>: > Hi Frans, > > Thanks for the reminder - I have sent the relevant request to the systems > team to set up the automatic e-mail notification when new issues and > actions are raised. > > Phil > > On 23/06/2015 10:13, Frans Knibbe wrote: > >> 2015-06-23 10:32 GMT+02:00 Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>: >> >> Yes, this is a good idea. There are also "raised" (pending) issues >>> related >>> to the UCR document and to me it is not clear which is the right >>> procedure >>> to fix them. >>> >>> >> I don't think there is an official procedure. What I would like to suggest >> (and have been doing) is: >> >> 1. Raise an issue. >> 2. Make sure there is at least one associated e-mail thread (Phil >> mentioned that should happen automatically but so far that has not >> happened >> in our case). >> 3. Debate the issue in the e-mail list. >> 4. Once the debate seems to be finished propose a solution and change >> the status of the issue to 'pending review'. >> 5. Make a final decision. For instance, accept the proposed solution >> in >> a meeting. >> >> If we could keep up a rate of resolving one issue each week we should have >> an issue-free document this year :-) >> >> Saludos, >> Frans >> >> >> >> Cheers, >>> Alejandro >>> >>> On 22 June 2015 at 21:46, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Ed, >>>> >>>> At the moment three UCR issues have the status 'pending review'. Of >>>> those, I think ISSUE-10 <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/10 >>>> > >>>> >>>> seems a good one to try to resolve. >>>> >>>> I don't know how long it will take to reach agreement. Perhaps it will >>>> help if resolving a particular issue is a separate agenda item. That >>>> should >>>> allow people to read up on the subject beforehand and to raise any >>>> problems >>>> with the proposed solution in the e-mail list. Ideally there will be no >>>> need for further discussion in the meeting and we can just have the >>>> vote. >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Frans >>>> >>>> 2015-06-22 20:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>: >>>> >>>> Hello Frans, >>>>> >>>>> Do you have a specific issue in mind, and some idea as to how long we >>>>> will need to discuss. Kerry is putting this weeks agenda together >>>>> tomorrow.. >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 at 17:43 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello Ed, Kerry, >>>>>> >>>>>> We still have some unresolved UCR issues. I believe it was Kerry who >>>>>> suggested that we might use the weekly teleconference to try to >>>>>> resolve >>>>>> one selected issue. Do you think there is time for that in the next >>>>>> meetings? If so, then I suggest we start with issues that relate to >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Practices because that is our next deliverable. Or we could have one >>>>>> of the >>>>>> UCR editors suggest an issue, and perhaps also do a bit of >>>>>> preparation of >>>>>> the issue to facilitate decision making. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Frans >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Frans Knibbe >>>>>> Geodan >>>>>> President Kennedylaan 1 >>>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >>>>>> >>>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >>>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl >>>>>> www.geodan.nl >>>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ed Parsons >>>>> Geospatial Technologist, Google >>>>> >>>>> Mobile +44 (0)7825 382263 >>>>> www.edparsons.com @edparsons >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Frans Knibbe >>>> Geodan >>>> President Kennedylaan 1 >>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >>>> >>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl >>>> www.geodan.nl >>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Alejandro Llaves >>> >>> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) >>> >>> Artificial Intelligence Department >>> >>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid >>> >>> Avda. Montepríncipe s/n >>> >>> Boadilla del Monte, 28660 Madrid, Spain >>> >>> >>> http://www.oeg-upm.net/index.php/phd/325-allaves >>> >>> >>> allaves@fi.upm.es >>> >>> >> >> >> > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1 > -- Frans Knibbe Geodan President Kennedylaan 1 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl www.geodan.nl disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 14:36:25 UTC