Re: XLink 1.1: Open issues?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bjoern Hoehrmann writes:

> * Norman Walsh wrote:
>>I do not believe that the requirements of formally addressing[1] each
>>comment applies to transitions before reaching last call.
>
> Well, if you really think the Process document is unclear, please see
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Plan/process-changes#changes-20050810
> (member-only, item 9) which states yet more clearly that the current
> Process document does require this.
>
>>Please let us know if this addresses your question of open issues.
>
> I understand from your response that you agree the XML Core Working
> Group did not formally address all comments concerning XLink 1.1 before
> publishing the Last Call Working Draft as required by the Process
> document, will investigate which comments have been missed, and formally
> address them now. I think that's a good way forward.

The XML Core WG asked me to respond to this thread in my role as Staff
Contact for the WG.  Three things need to be made clear at this point:

1) It would have been a good thing if the WG had replied to [1] and
[2] at the time saying that the WG judged the substantive comments
contained therein to be out-of-scope wrt the WG's charter for XLink 1.1;

2) In inadvertently failing to do so before publishing a Last Call WD,
the WG failed to comply with the Process as then in force (noting
however that the obligation for formal replies to comments on drafts
before Last Call has been moderated in the new Process [3] as published
last week);

3) The harm done was very small, and no further action will be taken
by the WG in this regard.

My apologies to the original commenters for failing to reply to you in
a timely fashion.  Under the circumstances we invite your comments on
the current Last Call draft [4] even though the official deadline for
comments has passed.  I would however advise you to consider carefully
whether any comments you have in mind to make are in scope as set out
in the Working Group Note [5] we are chartered [6] to implement.

ht

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JanMar/0009.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005AprJun/0003.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xlink11-20050707/
[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink10-ext/
[6] http://www.w3.org/2005/02/xml-core-wg-charter.html#deliverables
- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDVl1XkjnJixAXWBoRAqQ1AJ4ksQ2fJEG0FCIQHk/l2gmXZr0EQQCfbYuJ
aLb+cKH0MLOl0nz6syx0rJI=
=FV2Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 14:52:41 UTC