Re: Wednesday's scheduled WG telecon

Lofton Henderson wrote:
> WebCGM WG --
> 
> I see just one item on our near-future agenda currently.  We might be 
> able to handle it just as well by email, but right now I'm thinking that 
> some telecon discussion would be useful in helping to decide that.
> 
> We'll decide about Wednesday telecon after some discussion on this 
> message.  (Next regular telecon:  30th Dec -- probably be problematic 
> getting attendance; next after that is pretty late -- mid-January.)
> 
> The item:  in the next few weeks, we will need a PR-transition resolution.
> 
>  From [1], about the transition Request (to PR), "...The request SHOULD 
> include a link to the meeting minutes or email announcing the group's 
> decision to request the transition."
> 
> [1] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xmlfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.xsl&docstatus=pr-tr#transreq 
> 
> 
> Thierry, can we just circulate an email question to the WG?  We would 
> then assemble the URIs of all of the individual "yes" replies, into 
> another email that we would send to the WG (archived).  This seems 
> easier than trying to get sufficient telecon attendance.

Yes we deal with this resolution to move to PR by email with the aboce 
procedure you mentioned, ( or I could setup a questionnaire collecting 
answers, if needed). Therefore no need for a telecon and get full 
participation.


.... Therefore (per
> MoU), the WG is able to proceed with PR anytime after 17th December.

OK

....
> 
> QUESTION (mostly for Thierry).  What are the timing considerations for 
> the required PR transition telecon with the Director, for publication of 
> PR, and for initiation/duration of PR review by AC?

It takes about a week to plan a Transition Call with the director for 
moving to PR.
Than another few days for Publication of the proposed Rec in TR space.

After Publication, Once we have sent a Proposed Recommendation 
transition announcement to W3C Members and Chairs the AC reviews begins 
for a  period that MUST last at least four weeks.


> 
> [2] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xmlfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.xsl&docstatus=pr-tr 
> 
> 
> Looking at [2], it appears to me, given the approaching holidays and 
> given the OASIS schedule (final OS ballot during February), that we 
> should do something like:
> 
> 1.) any time after Dec.17 (OASIS ballot closures), send Transition 
> Request (Action:  Thierry & Lofton to write the request);

Yes I could start working on this Transition Request and we shoul plan a 
   Tansition call for 10-15 january.

> 
> 2.) arrange PR-advancement telecon with the Director -- the first (or 
> second) week of January seems reasonable, all things considered.

Yes, seems good.
> 
> 3.) anticipate publishing PR text and commencing (AC) PR review in 
> mid-January.  (Text is mostly ready now -- I only need to move your 
> cover page to the right place with the rest of the text.)

OK please do that to have a final frozen document. Then we can ask the 
WebCGM WG to agree to move to PR (I need this for the Transition Request).
> 
> 4.) plan for a 30-day (AC) PR review, mid-January until mid-February.


Yes this seems to be the proper timing (may need an extra week).


Is the implementation matrix uptodate with the current level of 
implementation ?
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/2009/WebCGM21/new21-matrix.html

Does the implementation cover page needs more work ?
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/2009/WebCGM21/implementation-report.html

Thierry.


> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Regards,
> -Lofton.
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 18:10:32 UTC