- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:16:18 -0700
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Guha <guha@google.com>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- CC: W3C Vocabularies <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
I don't see anything about this meeting on the TPAC page for proposals for this session. Is this part of the process just being skipped? As well, will an agenda be prepared for this session? There are a number of things on the boundary between W3c and schema.org that I think should be discussed. Some of these might be relevant to this session, but others might not. An agenda might help preventing the session from going off into things that are not relevant to the purpose of the meeting. peter On 09/29/2014 07:30 AM, Harry Halpin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 09/29/2014 04:15 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: >> On 09/24/2014 02:20 PM, Harry Halpin wrote: >>> Everyone, >>> >>> The W3C is happy to use one of the rooms during its "BOF" >>> sessions on Wednesday morning for a meeting around schema.org, >>> Actions, and the Social WG. >>> >>> The meeting would be open to *everyone* at TPAC, not just Social >>> WG members and those from schema.org. >>> >>> I hope this works for everyone! >>> >>> The schedule is here: >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2014 >>> >>> A room will be reserved with this pre-set topic for 9:15 AM. We >>> can then continue as needed. Does this work for everyone? >> Can I participate remotely? > > We'll do our best for remote participation. IRC is definitely always > running and we'll have a scribe, audio can be trickier depending o the > venue's set-up but I'll know a few days a head of time when I get to > the venue for TPAC. > >> >> Thank you Harry for arranging this possibility to meet f2f and >> clarify all the possibilities for further collaboration! >> > > Hope it works for the schema.org folks! Does it?
Received on Monday, 29 September 2014 15:16:51 UTC