- From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 21:15:19 +0000
- To: <fd@w3.org>, <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>
- CC: <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
I understand that there is a minimum 4-week period for CR. But what is the maximum? Can a document linger at CR for a long period until the exit criteria are satisfied? Simon -----Original Message----- From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org] Sent: Thursday, 1 June, 2017 07:12 To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org Subject: RE: Time Ontology - adjust CR exit criteria > From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au] > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 11:04 PM > > Seems fair enough on the surface, though not quite so sure in practice. > > I guess 'producer implementation' is intended to mean some kind of > service that publishes using OWL-Time, and 'consumer implementation' > some application that is consuming data published using OWL-Time? In a > linked- data/restful context is a resource that mentions some other > resource which, when de-referenced, mentions OWL-Time resources, a > "consumer implementation"? I do not know how to define "consumer implementation", perhaps others can clarify. I would personally assume something that injects OWL-Time resources to do something with it, e.g. to render it in some human readable way or to compute something out of it. Following links to see a mention seems somewhat passive. Francois. > > Simon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org] > Sent: Thursday, 1 June, 2017 01:08 > To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; > chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk > Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org > Subject: Time Ontology - adjust CR exit criteria > > Simon, Chris, Time Ontology enthusiasts, > > The Director recommends to amend the first sub-bullet of bullet 3 of > the CR exit criteria to mention both producers and consumers of the > ontology, from "Demonstrated use in two external implementations" to > "Demonstrated use in at least two producer implementations and two > consumer implementations". Would that be ok with you? > > Thanks, > Francois. >
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2017 21:16:34 UTC