- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 08:41:25 -0700
- To: "noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Reviewing all the Pending Review action items, I have questions mainly around what follow-on actions should be taken, where there is no ISSUE or the issue has no appropriate next steps. It's likely that my questions can be answered in email, so it isn't clear meeting time is necessary. I'm OK closing all the ones not mentioned below: * ACTION-165 Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document The last message I can find on this topic indicates significant disagreement. So I'm not sure where that leads after this action. What are next steps on the issue, if any? * ACTION-193 Try to draft a blog posting adapted from http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/hash-in-url, with help from TVR It looks like the result of this action was "inspiration hasn't struck" which seems a bit lame. The underlying issue has no follow-on actions. The "hash-in-url" document looks interesting, relevant to ongoing W3C work. Should there be some follow-on action, e.g., asking affected W3C working groups or others to review the draft document? (And "draft a blog posting" didn't come up when we discussed possible ways the TAG could make information available and create lasting artifacts.) * ACTION-227 Summarize TAG work on metadata, with Larry While Jonathan has done this action (great job, no help from me), I don't see a follow-on ACTION or associated ISSUE. It's on our agenda, but I suggest leaving the ACTION open until we've decided what to do next. * ACTION-221 Work with Dave Orchard to close up the formalism facet of the versioning document, due in two weeks Again, I think there are related topics on the agenda, but I'm not sure what the plan is for wrapping up the current round of versioning work. -----Original Message----- From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:26 PM To: www-tag@w3.org Subject: TAG Pending Review Action Items Often on teleconferences we attempt to close by "voice vote" action items that are marked PENDING REVIEW, I.e. those that the person responsible believes are completed. I was preparing to do the same on Thursday's call, but when I pulled up the list at [1] it seemed unusually long. To avoid spending a lot of time on the call, I'm suggesting an alternative procedure for this week: please look at the list now. If there are any that you don't give me as chair permission to close or not at my discretion, then let me know and we'll either resolve via email or discuss just those on Thursday. So, silence is assent to my doing what I think best, which in most cases will be to close. As a placeholder, I'll put an item on the agenda referencing this note, but I'm hoping to be able to pass by it without spending significant time. A somewhat rough text version of the list is attached. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/pendingreview -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 -------------------------------------- Technical Architecture Group Issue Tracking Generated by [21]Tracker - Version 1.10 [21] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ Pending review Actions There are 11 pending review actions. [_] [25]ACTION-165[26] (edit) pending review [27]Formulate erratum text on versioning for the web architecture document John Kemp 2009-02-24 [28]XMLVersioning-41 [_] [29]ACTION-176[30] (edit) pending review [31]send comments on exi w.r.t. evaluation and efficiency Noah Mendelsohn 2009-03-02 [32]binaryXML-30 [_] [33]ACTION-193[34] (edit) pending review [35]Try to draft a blog posting adapted from http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/hash-in-url, with help from TVR Dan Connolly 2009-02-25[36]webApplicationState-60 [_] [37]ACTION-200[38] (edit) pending review [39]Revise "Uniform Access to Metadata" (needs title change) to add XRD use case Jonathan Rees 2009-02-24 [40]HttpRedirections-57 [_] [41]ACTION-205[42] (edit) pending review [43]Henry to begin responding to Marcos asking the question: Why does the spec not say "A conforming spec MUST recommend a hierarchical adressing schems that can be used to address the individual resources within a widget resource from within a config doc, widget, or other constituent of the same widget pkg." Henry S. Thompson 2009-01-15 [44]WebApps access control requirements review [_] [45]ACTION-213[46] (edit) pending review [47]Convene weekly teleconference, take roll (regrets: Tim), review agenda Noah Mendelsohn 2009-01-01 [48]ultimateQuestion-42 [_] [49]ACTION-215[50] (edit) pending review [51]Announce minutes of 19 Feb TAG teleconference Ashok Malhotra 2009-02-23 [52]ultimateQuestion-42 [_] [53]ACTION-217[54] (edit) pending review [55]Raise moving the registry to w3.org with Mark Nottingham Jonathan Rees 2009-02-24 [56]HttpRedirections-57 [_] [57]ACTION-221[58] (edit) pending review [59]Work with Dave Orchard to close up the formalism facet of the versioning document, due in two weeks Jonathan Rees 2009-02-24 [60]XMLVersioning-41 [_] [61]ACTION-227[62] (edit) pending review [63]Summarize TAG work on metadata, with Larry Jonathan Rees 2009-02-24 [_] [64]ACTION-230[65] (edit) pending review [66]Get Noah to look at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34786/TPAC2009/ Dan Connolly 2009-03-09 References: [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/?sort=status [23] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/?sort=owner [24] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/?sort=due [25] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/165 [26] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/165/edit [27] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/165 [28] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/41 [29] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/176 [30] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/176/edit [31] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/176 [32] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/30 [33] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/193 [34] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/193/edit [35] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/193 [36] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/60 [37] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/200 [38] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/200/edit [39] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/200 [40] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57 [41] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/205 [42] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/205/edit [43] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/205 [44] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/products/2 [45] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/213 [46] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/213/edit [47] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/213 [48] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/42 [49] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/215 [50] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/215/edit [51] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/215 [52] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/42 [53] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/217 [54] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/217/edit [55] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/217 [56] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/57 [57] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/221 [58] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/221/edit [59] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/221 [60] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/issues/41 [61] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/227 [62] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/227/edit [63] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/227 [64] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/230 [65] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/230/edit [66] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/230
Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 15:42:07 UTC