- From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:14:50 -0700
- To: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
- Cc: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Michael Dolan <mike@dolan.tv>, "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
Hi Thierry, > Publishing those XSD in the W3C space (out of TR) is easy. It is a stable URI. It has been used for years. Can you give an example of a resource "in the W3C space (out of TR)"? What is the process for modifying such resources that are referenced in a REC? Thanks, -- Pierre On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: > Please let's have a simple process here. > > Publishing those XSD in the W3C space (out of TR) is easy. It is a stable > URI. It has been used for years. > > I prefer this than publishing in Github, which may not be stable and is not > user frendly. > > Thierry > > > > > Le 24/06/2017 à 18:26, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux a écrit : >> >> Hi Nigel, >> >> It sounds like we are inventing a new process when the WG Note process >> already exists. >> >> Best, >> >> -- Pierre >> >> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 24 Jun 2017, at 17:20, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Nigel, >>>> >>>>> Why the complexity here? >>>> >>>> >>>> I am concerned that modifying the github repo can be done by any >>>> number of folks, including by mistake. >>> >>> >>> It can; I would suggest tagging a release when we have a known good state >>> (as far as we are aware at that time) and declaring the current operational >>> release tag in a protected master branch readme file. >>> >>> Then any change would only be reflected in a new release by explicit >>> decision, which could be by Group consensus. >>> >>> Nigel >>> >>>> >>>> Revising a WG Note requires group consensus. >>>> >>>> I am open to other options. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> -- Pierre >>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> Why the complexity here? Can't we just publish the GitHub repo details >>>>> and host them directly from there? That makes them much easier to use and >>>>> update. >>>>> >>>>> Nigel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 24 Jun 2017, at 06:45, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike, >>>>>> We don't necessarly need to have a WG Note for this. >>>>>> We can publish the current schemas files on the W3C site (out of TR) >>>>>> and that will be good enough. No over burdon. >>>>>> >>>>>> I propose to host those schemas at >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/IMSC/ttml-imsc1.0.1/xml-schemas/ >>>>>> >>>>>> and change the link in the spec to this URI. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thierry >>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 24/06/2017 à 01:04, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux a écrit : >>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> put the schemas in a WG Note now and reference it before publishing >>>>>>>> IMSC1.0.1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ok with me. I would create a separate directory on the IMSC github >>>>>>> repo to host the WG Note and XSD collection. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Happy to do this by Monday COB, in time for approval on Thursday and >>>>>>> the IMSC1.0.1 CR transition, unless significant concerns are raised. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This switch might not even be substantive since the XSD are >>>>>>> informative in IMSC1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Pierre >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Michael Dolan <mike@dolan.tv> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Given the apparent process challenges for updating the informative >>>>>>>> schemas >>>>>>>> for IMSC1, I’d like to propose that we do that before publication of >>>>>>>> IMSC1.0.1 – put the schemas in a WG Note now and reference it before >>>>>>>> publishing IMSC1.0.1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Michael A DOLAN >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TBT, Inc; PO Box 190 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Del Mar, CA 92014 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1-858-882-7497 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------- >>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk >>>>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and >>>>> may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless >>>>> specifically stated. >>>>> If you have received it in >>>>> error, please delete it from your system. >>>>> Do not use, copy or disclose the >>>>> information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender >>>>> immediately. >>>>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails >>>>> sent or received. >>>>> Further communication will signify your consent to >>>>> this. >>>>> -----------------------------
Received on Sunday, 25 June 2017 17:15:45 UTC