- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:21:33 -0500 (EST)
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
DanC,
I'm looking at our charter and the last call requirements as
specified by the W3C[1], and I'm just wondering - is it enough to go to
Last Call if I e-mail Ian Jacobs and then in some sort of list point out
how we have fulfilled every aspect of our charter and closed all our
technical issues?
However, I am also worried about our last decision to postpone
[#issue-tx-element] [2]. Can we go to Last Call with an issue postponed
instead of resolved? I think I remember you saying so on our last telecon,
but cannot find proof here [1].
The other option would be to rule it out of scope, since it would require
a whole new GRDDL algorithm to basically do some sort of tree-search for
"GRDDL transform parent elements" - I can see how this works, in fact,
I've even outline a generalized case for it with Henry and started on an
implementation[3], but think this falls more naturally as part 2 of a XML
Processing Model Group and not as a GRDDL WG.
The text I'm looking at is[1]:
" * the Working Group believes that it has satisfied its relevant
technical requirements (e.g., of the charter or requirements document) in
the Working Draft;"
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#last-call
[2] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#issue-tx-element
[3] http://www2006.org/programme/item.php?id=5060
--
--harry
Harry Halpin
Informatics, University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin
Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2007 01:21:42 UTC