W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-comments@w3.org > September 2009

Re: OWL 2

From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:11:01 +0100
Message-Id: <22FE0608-523D-48AB-BD57-01D62E1D9F8C@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
To: "Mark Montgomery" <markm@kyield.com>
Dear Mark,

Thank you for your comment
      <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/ 
2009Sep/0038.html>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

Unfortunately we don't have the resources within the Working Group to  
produce the kind of material you describe. Hopefully this gap will be  
filled by third parties such as Kyield.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl- 
comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your  
acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied  
with the working group's response to your comment.

Regards,
Ian Horrocks
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group



On 24 Sep 2009, at 15:19, Mark Montgomery wrote:

> Just wanted to drop in, say hello, and thanks for continuing to  
> push OWL forward. Have just reviewed the wiki and reflecting back  
> more than a dozen years to when many of us were struggling with  
> basic tags in order to imbed some intelligence into the web, often  
> frustrated spending far more time on compatibility issues, which  
> was taking value from me personally while preventing the delivery  
> of higher value to others.
>
> The only comment I would make is on communications. The wiki format  
> is a good one, but still not they type of communications format  
> found or understood in the fickle executive suite. Back when I was  
> fully engaged in venture capital while moving Kyield forward, the  
> two worlds and cultures (CS and finance) so radically different  
> that I actually divided the days, finding that if I attempted to  
> work on both the same day, both would suffer.
>
> While I suppose one could argue that it's the job of vendors and  
> end users to communicate internally and externally, I'm still not  
> wondering if a white paper format restricted to standards wouldn't  
> be helpful in explaining to business morons why this work is so  
> relevant. We've attempted to tone down the sales effort in our  
> small contribution to that effort and have been very pleasantly  
> surprised (shocked is a better word), particularly with the Unleash  
> the innovation within piece.
>
> Beyond that I will attempt to digest the possibilities for adoption  
> from my perch.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Mark Montgomery
> Founder
> Kyield
>
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 13:11:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 September 2009 13:11:42 GMT