Update Issue List Format

In respect of the action from the last telecon:

  A9: Brian McBride edit the errata per the resolutions above; i.e. those
    regarding 
                   #rdf-ns-prefix-confusion 
    CONTINUED. [ArtB to work with Brian to get Brian write access to
    to the errata and to determine a strategy for maintaining the
    appropriate documents.]

Art and I have discussed how to document the WG decisions, taking a number
of factors into account:

  o Updates to the M&S errata document are normative.  It would be
    sensible to get some feedback from the community before taking
    that step.  Further, as we resolve issues, we will discover 
    dependencies between them, e.g. the decision to remove
    aboutEachPrefix affects rdfms-namespace-prefix-confusion.  It is
    undesirable to keep changing a normative document.

  o We felt that maintaining the status of issues in a single document
    would help to ensure a consistent representation of the status of
    issues was maintained at all times.

As I reported at last week's teleconference the M&S errata document:

  http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/errata

has been updated to refer to the issues list:

  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/

The issues list document structure has been changed, with a section
'Attention Developers' which summarizes the decisions that affect
developers and has links to further more detailed information.

I'm trying to find a good balance of ease of maintenance for the WG and
effective communications with the RDF community.

Please review the issues list format and share your comments.  I have
scheduled a short discussion for the telecon on 8/Jun 2001, if there is
time at the end of the agenda.

Brian

Received on Thursday, 7 June 2001 10:38:26 UTC