- From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:07:18 -0500
- To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org, public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF5EB3F80A.29A5D8B9-ON87257233.006555D9-85257234.004D7549@us.ibm.com>
Asir, so let me see if I understand what you are questioning.... I did assume that the action item I took ( 77) covered the items d-h. I think Frederick has offered (as we have done in the past) to "review" my changes for readability. When I took previous actions, either Toufic or Dave looked at the proposed changes, and gave feedback. I would assume that Frederick will do the same. Frederick, it has been our process to have one person do the actual changes, so I think this is why Asir is asking these questions. For anything not "editorial" I would think we would need to open an issue and have it reviewed and assigned to the editorial team. Frederick, is that your understanding? or did you have more substantive changes in mind? and if so, were you planning to open issues for these? It has been our process to have the editors take actions that the working group has agreed to. Does that make sense to everyone? Maryann FYI.... Frederick I will need to correct something I did in the document and just want to make sure that we don't collide in any editing attempts. Asir has pointed out that section 4.4.8 belongs in the Primer, not in the guidelines although I think a pointer to the primer should be in the guidelines doc. Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com> Sent by: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org 11/21/2006 08:25 PM To Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, Maryann Hondo/Austin/IBM@IBMUS cc <public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org> Subject Action-77, Action-80, Action-84 (was RE: agenda for today's policy editors call On the tracker, there are three actions for implementing the resolution for issue 3792: 77, 80 and 84. Issue 3792 [1] resolution is as follows: Primer a) Retain Section 4.2 (fold into section 3) b) Retain Section 4.4.8 (fold into section 3) c) Drop section 4 Guidelines d) Absorb Section 4.3, Primer e) Absorb Section 4.5, Primer, as a new section (lead-in or follow-on) f) Blend in contents from Section 4 and 4.1, Primer g) Use the style of guidance for designing assertions from Section 4.4, Primer (for instance, enumerate the set of design questions) h) Use forward pointers to show where the answers can be found for these design questions. Action-80 [2] covers items a)-c). Action-77 [3] covers items d)-h). I assume that any proposed new content or proposed changes to existing content will embark the natural path: commentator opens a WG issue and proposes a resolution, WG discusses and resolves the issue, WG adopts a resolution, editors open a corresponding editorial action (s) ... >I can take an editorial pass on the guidelines What is an editorial pass? >I think it is simplest to update with my editorial suggestions Are there any e-mails to the WG that describe these editorial (or substantial) suggestions? Or, are there any related WG issues? It is not clear what is the intent for the third action, Action-84 [4]. Are we trying to split items d)-h) into two actions? If positive, what is the split? [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3792#c2 [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/80 [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/77 [4] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/84 Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu Microsoft Corporation -----Original Message----- From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 9:10 AM To: ext Maryann Hondo Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org Subject: Re: agenda for today's policy editors call I can take an editorial pass on the guidelines, the week after next. Next week I will be on vacation and unavailable. I think it is simplest to update with my editorial suggestions as well as other agreed changes and then share that revision. It is more work to write up the suggestions than to edit. Editors can then review the redline, and I can then update with additional changes as needed. Will this work? regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Nov 15, 2006, at 11:17 AM, ext Maryann Hondo wrote: > > I believe its my turn to chair the editors meeting since I was > scribe last week. > > Welcome to Fred & Umit. > We have generally followed a rotation pattern .....we can review > this on the call. > > > So, > > The primary topic we need to cover is the plan for getting the > Guidelines and Primer documents to the working group. > > > Logistics: > Duration: 1hour - 2pm-3pm Eastern > Dial-in: See http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/policy/editors#meetings > > Zakim------- The code is 3348 (617-761-6200) > IRC----------------#ws-policy-eds > > > Proposed Agenda: > > 1. Administrative > > > review the rotation.....add in umit & fred > > a. This week's arrangements: > Chair -Maryann > Scribe - ?? > Regrets: > > > b.Editorial Team Report: will be delivered by Dave O (yes?) > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy-eds/2006Nov/ > 0051.html > > c. Last call's Minutes: http://www.w3.org/2006/11/09-ws-policy- > eds-minutes.html > > 2. Open Editors Action Items (status Review): > http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/open > > 3.The primary topic we need to cover is the plan for getting the > Guidelines and Primer documents to the working group. > 4. NEW Editorial Actions from this week's WG Conference Call > > 5. AOB? > > Maryann > >
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 14:12:31 UTC