RE: PR related changes

[2]
I had some problem with the earlier but I changed it today and it seems fine. I have used our earlier text for comments.

[3]
CR~PR diffs:
SML: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2007/xml/sml/extra/sml-diff-between-CR-and-PR.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8

SML-IF: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2007/xml/sml/extra/sml-if-diff-between-CR-and-PR.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8


The diffs are slightly out of sync. I will update them once we are done with all other changes to the spec.

[4]
I get the same error for the updated SML WG home page. Instead of ‘This document ...’ can we try ‘The SML and SML-IF specifications ...’ ?



From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Arwe
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 9:25 AM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Subject: Re: PR related changes


[1] Pub date is on the agenda for this week.  Arbitrary is as good as anything right now.
[2] I think we can have them use bugzilla, i.e. just use the same text as we've had all along.
[3] Could you provide link to the diff?  I'll add it to the Request.
[4] I updated the SML WG home page, see if the checker is happier now.  The text you suggested "This document ..." does not make sense for a WG page, I think that was intended for the documents being published.  So I copied (and tweaked, so it still points at SML) a similar section from XML Core, which has certainly been putting out Rec updates recently.
[5] sorry no help from me on the checker.

Best Regards, John

Street address: 2455 South Road, P328 Poughkeepsie, NY USA 12601
Voice: 1+845-435-9470      Fax: 1+845-432-9787
From:

Kumar Pandit <kumarp@windows.microsoft.com>

To:

"public-sml@w3.org" <public-sml@w3.org>

Cc:

Kumar Pandit <kumarp@windows.microsoft.com>

Date:

01/28/2009 02:59 AM

Subject:

PR related changes

Sent by:

public-sml-request@w3.org


________________________________



I have made PR publication related changes to both specs. They turned out to be a lot more work than I have done in the past for earlier publications.

Michael, there are a few questions directed at you (see [2], [4] and [5]). Can you please take a look?

[1]
I arbitrarily chose Feb 12th (2 weeks after this Thursday’s call) as the PR publication date. Consequently the end-of-review-period date is March 12th.

[2]
From pub rules:
1.        It also MUST provide information to Advisory Committee Representatives about how to send their review comments (e.g., a link to a WBS review form)
Please verify. Found a link to an online questionnaire<http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/myQuestionnaires>. Does this link provide access to the review form?

I obtained the link to questionnaire from pub rules sample. I do not know if the link is correct or if we need to create an SML specific questionnaire for the AC reps.
Michael, can you please comment?

[3]
I have created and checked in a diff between PR and CR drafts as required by the PR text. I have noted that “None of the changes affect the conformance criteria.”. The group should verify this statement in the next conf call.

[4]
If I understood the error message correctly, Michael needs to update the SML WG home page as described in the error below:

1.        It MUST include this text related to patent policy requirements (with suitable links inserted; see guidelines for linking to disclosure pages<http://www.w3.org/2005/07/13-pubrules-disclosure>):

This document was produced by a group operating under the 5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/>. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures<http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/@@URI%20%20to%20IPP%20status%20or%20other%20page@@> made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s)<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential> must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Disclosure>.
Include this source code:
<p> This document was produced by a group operating under the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/">5 February 2004 W3C Patent Policy</a>. W3C maintains a <a rel="disclosure" href="@@URI to IPP status or other page@@">public list of any patent disclosures</a> made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential">Essential Claim(s)</a> must disclose the information in accordance with <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Disclosure">section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy</a>. </p>

Note: Contact the Communications Team for suitable adaptations in the case where a document has been published jointly by more than one group. In the adaptation, be sure that the text for informative-only specs or specs not going to Rec is the same as the standard text.

 *   Error. Although the boilerplate text is correct, there is an inconsistency with respect to IPP for the group identified by http://www.w3.org/XML/SML/: Error. The link to the public disclosures page does not have the right link text; please refer to boilerplate.



[5]
The pub rules checker works correctly for SML-IF but errors out for SML spec (does not check rules after rule 12) therefore I could not check that doc completely. I had faced similar bug during CR publication. I do not know how to resolve this. Michael?