W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > May 2017

Re: Proposed new release schedule for BP doc

From: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 16:30:19 +0000
Message-ID: <CADtUq_2HisUwn=jN-zUT8bv5481R0zS4MpLqSHMfQD8zsZZVoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>, Byron Cochrane <bcochrane@linz.govt.nz>
Cc: "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "eparsons@google.com" <eparsons@google.com>, "l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl" <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, "jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com" <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>, "chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk" <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>, "portele@interactive-instruments.de" <portele@interactive-instruments.de>, "fd@w3.org" <fd@w3.org>, "phila@w3.org" <phila@w3.org>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Scott. Good news. We voted to release the SWD BP doc!!! Consensus was "yes"

François has requested publication by the W3C webmaster. The doc should be
at https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/ prior to the TC webinar on Monday.

Jeremy


On Wed, 10 May 2017 at 14:24, Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
wrote:

> Then let’s plan a webinar on the two candidates. Once the final drafts are
> posted, I will need to give the TC two weeks notice for such presentations.
> I do have a bit of a messy travel schedule in the coming weeks, including
> ISO TC/211. I can run webinars while I am on the road, but just with a bit
> more constrained of timing.
>
> Scott
>
> On May 9, 2017, at 5:49 PM, Byron Cochrane <bcochrane@linz.govt.nz> wrote:
>
> I will also be in St John’s.  But my perspective on SSN and OWL-Time is
> limited.
>
> Cheers,
> Byron
>
> *From:* Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
> ]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 9 May 2017 11:52 a.m.
> *To:* ssimmons@opengeospatial.org
> *Cc:* jeremy.tandy@gmail.com; eparsons@google.com;
> l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl; jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com;
> chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk; portele@interactive-instruments.de;
> fd@w3.org; phila@w3.org; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: Proposed new release schedule for BP doc
>
> Possibly only Josh in attendance in St Johns who has much vision of these
> activities.
>
> *From:* Scott Simmons [mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 9 May, 2017 09:00
> *To:* Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
> *Cc:* Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>; Ed Parsons <
> eparsons@google.com>; Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>;
> Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>; Chris Little <
> chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>; Clemens Portele <
> portele@interactive-instruments.de>; Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>; Phil
> Archer <phila@w3.org>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Proposed new release schedule for BP doc
>
> Simon,
>
> We will, but since they are intended to be standards, we probably should
> do both in person in St. John’s or schedule more lead time for a webinar.
>
> Best Regards,
> Scott
>
>
> On May 8, 2017, at 4:43 PM, <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
> wrote:
>
>
> Do you also need briefings on SSN and OWL-Time?
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, 8 May 2017 9:37:35 AM
> *To:* Ed Parsons; Linda van den Brink; Scott Simmons; Joshua Lieberman;
> Chris Little
> *Cc:* Clemens Portele; Francois Daoust; Phil Archer; SDW WG Public List
> *Subject:* Re: Proposed new release schedule for BP doc
>
> Hi-
>
> Scott: I've not yet seen confirmation of the TC webinar to introduce the
> SDW BP - scheduled for Mon 15-May-2017. Did I miss something?
>
> Josh & Chris: it looks like it will be just me presenting the BP doc as
> Linda and (probably) Ed will not be able to make it. Can I count on your
> attendance as OAB folk to provide necessary support? Thanks.
>
> Everyone else is welcome too!
>
> Jeremy
>
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2017 at 09:27 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looking at the schedule for my meeting in Geneva, I'm almost certain that
> I will be able to present SDW BP to the TC at 15:00UTC. So let's go for
> that day & time. Please will you (Scott) send my details of the videoconf?
> On Fri, 5 May 2017 at 08:49, Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com> wrote:
>
> I'm afraid I have an all day meeting, on that day I may be able to step
> out also and if so hold Jeremy's coat..
> Ed
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2017, 09:31 Linda van den Brink, <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> wrote:
>
> I am on holiday then – but feel free to go ahead without me.
>
> *Van:* Jeremy Tandy [mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com]
> *Verzonden:* donderdag 4 mei 2017 22:21
> *Aan:* Scott Simmons
> *CC:* Clemens Portele; Ed Parsons; Francois Daoust; Linda van den Brink;
> Phil Archer; SDW WG Public List
> *Onderwerp:* Re: Proposed new release schedule for BP doc
>
> I'll be in Geneva from Wed 10th May for a week ... but should be able to
> duck out of my other meetings for the webinar. Monday 15-May is probably
> best for me.
>
> Ed, Linda - what do you think?
>
> On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 21:17 Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
> wrote:
>
> Jeremy,
>
> In follow-up, let’s also pick a date for a TC-wide webinar to present the
> BP. These are scheduled for one hour and involve a presentation of the
> document contents ranging in length from 10 - 30 minutes followed by Q&A. I
> like to give members about 2 weeks notice, so would some time the week of
> the 15th work? We have such webinars scheduled that week for Monday (15
> May) and Wednesday at 1500 UTC. Also note that there is an upcoming TC
> Meeting preview webinar on Wednesday, so that may be a bd day to add yet
> another OGC duty to peoples’ calendars!
>
> Best Regards,
> Scott
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's good to know. Many thanks
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 at 16:43, Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
> wrote:
>
> Jeremy,
>
> We would be well underway on the vote by the June TC meeting and can use
> that week to lobby for votes - actually it is a good thing as we tend to
> get the best voting on ballots that run through TC weeks!
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It's more than reordering. There's still some pretty substantial work
> going in around BPs 8 and 10 (old numbers) being lead by Andrea and Bill
> respectively. Plus the addition of a new conclusions section.
>
> Apologies that this means we then fail to hit the physical TC / PC in
> June; but i need that extra time.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 at 16:35, Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
> wrote:
>
> Jeremy,
>
> The schedule mostly works and yes, I did note that this document has
> certainly abided by the 3-week rule in comparison to other documents that
> get posted in a very incomplete state just to make a deadline! The crux is
> how major are the changes to this last revision: if mostly reordering, we
> can work against your proposed schedule. If there were really major changes
> to content, we should give the TC 3 weeks to review because this is a Best
> Practice and not an Engineering Report or Discussion Paper.
>
> So let’s say we are going with a 3-week Pending timeline. Because the
> document has been on Pending for multiple drafts for quite some time, I
> have no issue letting the presentation occur during the 3-week review
> period. So if the final to-be-voted version is posted on 8 May, we would
> start the vote on 29 May, which ends the vote in mid-July. After the vote,
> there would be a 2-week electronic (email) vote by the PC.
>
> What is your honest appraisal of this revision: reordering and refinement
> or major changes?
>
> Scott
>
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:22 AM, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Clemens - I remember Scott saying that we've "already passed the 3-week
> rule" because we've been making drafts available for previous months! It
> was probably a little tongue-in-cheek, but Scott didn't seem to be too
> concerned.
>
> Scott: what do you think?
>
> > would it be really a problem, if the TC vote would finish after June
> 30, ie after the end of the SDW WG? If there are any comments associated
> with the vote that need to be addressed, maybe the Geosemantics DWG could
> be responsible?
>
> I think this would be fine. Also, I think that there is (a little)
> flexibility from the W3C perspective on the final closure date of the WG if
> we're able to demonstrate that there is a completion plan in place. Or at
> least that's my understanding.
>
> Jeremy
>
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 at 16:16 Clemens Portele <
> portele@interactive-instruments.de> wrote:
>
> Jeremy,
>
> one comment:
>
>
> Clearly our revised timetable squeezes the time between vote to release
> and the TC webinar - but I don't see an issue with that. Please advise if
> you feel otherwise.
>
>
> I think there were three weeks (based on the 3-week-rule in the OGC
> policies & procedures) between the release of the document (i.e. the
> publication to pending documents in the OGC portal) and the webinar. We
> probably cannot shorten this period unless all members agree?
>
> However, would it be really a problem, if the TC vote would finish after
> June 30, ie after the end of the SDW WG? If there are any comments
> associated with the vote that need to be addressed, maybe the Geosemantics
> DWG could be responsible?
>
> Best regards,
> Clemens
>
>
>
> On 25. Apr 2017, at 16:43, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [Scott, François / Phil - I'm looking to you to 'approve' the new
> schedule, in that it meets with the milestones needed for OGC and W3C]
>
> As happens from time to time, timescales for deliverables sometimes get
> delayed. Unfortunately, this was the case for the anticipated BP WD release
> (scheduled for a vote tomorrow; 26-April). Apologies, my fault.
>
> There's still quite a lot to do this sprint!
>
> Linda and I have come up with a new timeline for BP release:
>
> - Monday 8-May: freeze document (work finished on this sprint)
> - Wednesday 10-May: WG vote to release*
>
> Then from Scott's email [1] the following dates are taken:
>
> - Friday 12-May: webinar** to present Best Practices to Technical
> Committee (TC)
> - Sunday 14-May: start TC recommendation vote (45 days)
> - Friday 30-Jun: Planning Committee (PC) approval at face-to-face meeting
> in St. John’s
>
> Clearly our revised timetable squeezes the time between vote to release
> and the TC webinar - but I don't see an issue with that. Please advise if
> you feel otherwise.
>
> Regarding the TC webinar - I ask for support from OAB members who have
> been involved in the BP work (Josh- I'm thinking that you have been more
> involved with the BP stuff than Chris?) to ensure that we're delivering the
> right message to the TC. Please.
>
> We editors anticipate a further set of purely editorial changes, fixing
> typos, getting consistent style etc. following this vote to release. I am
> assuming we can make these changes while the TC recommendation vote is
> on-going and release a revised version at the end?
>
> * the call on 10-May is scheduled as a BP sub-group call, which would
> nominally occur at 15:00UTC. So- we can either vote by correspondence, -OR-
> we could reschedule the call to 20:00UTC to make participation/voting
> easier for our Australian colleagues (albeit an early start). PLEASE ADVISE
> ON YOUR PREFERENCE: vote by correspondence or change the time.
>
> ** Scott: what do you envisage for this webinar? Just an overview of the
> key points; aims and structure of the doc? I guess that the TC have 45 days
> before the vote closes, so there's plenty of time to read after the WG vote
> to release.
>
> Regards, Jeremy & Linda
>
> [1]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Mar/0240.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Ed Parsons *FRGS
> Geospatial Technologist, Google
> +44 7825 382263 <+44%207825%20382263> @edparsons
> www.edparsons.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> This message contains information, which may be in confidence and may be
> subject to legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you must
> not peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message. If you have
> received this message in error, please notify us immediately (Phone 0800
> 665 463 or info@linz.govt.nz) and destroy the original message. LINZ
> accepts no responsibility for changes to this email, or for any
> attachments, after its transmission from LINZ. Thank You.
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 10 May 2017 16:31:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 May 2017 16:31:08 UTC