W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Minutes: 2002-09-20

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:03:42 +0300
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, Patrick S tickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <Ny4QtPSlhrK0.1JJmKX2J@mail.nokia.com>

_____________Original message ____________
Subject:	Re: Minutes: 2002-09-20
Sender:	ext Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date:		Wed, 25 Sep 2002 18:31:41 +0300


> Well, the decision has been made

as scribe I was unclear what to make of the chairs message "On Consensus", 
which is why I thought it worth linking it from the minutes.

	Well, I understand your reasons, but minutes are
	minutes and list discussions are something else.
 	The minutes should reflect the telecon, partiularly
	when decisions are made.

As WG member I would support the chair in taking into account Jos's uncast 
vote and unmaking the decision (should the chair so desire).

	It's unclear to me that Jos is in fact opposed to
	the decision rather than concerned about the
	abstract syntax and N-Triples representation.


Also,  I would have resisted the making of a decision with so much dissent if 
that dissent had been visible.

	The place for dissent to have been visible should have
	been in the vote. Its not like folks haven't had enough
	time to consider the implications of either option.

	The WG has had at least three straw polls since the f2f,
	and a formal vote, and an inquiry to the community and
	all of them have favored untidy. Thus, there has been
	a majority preference for some time. Friday's decision
	was not simply a fluke.

	I don't mean to be some pedantic 'stickler' ;-) for process,
	but it seems to me that the decision was in fact made
	according to the defined W3C process, and there are
	clear steps to be taken to consider its modification, and
	that includes persuasive arguments from those opposed.

	Should these be presented to the WG, I will gladly review them
	along with the rest of the WG. 
	I believe that it will be most productive to complete the specs
	reflecting Friday's decision so that a broader audience can 
	offer their comments. The WG is closely divided on the issue,
	yes, but a majority view has persisted for some time, bolstered by
	community feedback, and that should be sufficient to proceed
	based on Friday's decision.

Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2002 12:13:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:15 UTC