W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > October to December 2007

RE: Role of 'public-webont-comments'? [WAS: Are the acyclicity "nonstructural restrictions" too strict?]

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:40:57 +0200
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A04A8434@judith.fzi.de>
To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Owl Dev" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>

Many thanks, Bijan!

So OWL-DEV will keep being my favourite list! ;-)

Cheers,
Michael

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bijan Parsia [mailto:bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk] 
>Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 10:31 AM
>To: Michael Schneider
>Cc: Ian Horrocks; Owl Dev
>Subject: Re: Role of 'public-webont-comments'? [WAS: Are the 
>acyclicity "nonstructural restrictions" too strict?]
>
>On Oct 17, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Michael Schneider wrote:
>[snip]
>
>If I might jump in....
>
>> Another (meta) question which might also be of interest to other's  
>> here in
>> the list: Yesterday I have found that there is a mailing list called
>>
>>   "public-webont-comments"
>>
>> which seems to have to do with the new OWL-WG,
>
>It was created for the old webont working group, thus has not *yet*  
>had anything to do with the new OWL-WG. Most working groups have a  
>members list and a public comments list. I don't believe the W3C team  
>(and certainly not the group) have decided whether to reuse public- 
>webont-comments, or to have a public-owl-comments (similar to public- 
>owl-wg) list (though I didn't check). Public-owl-dev is a general  
>purpose list for discussion everything owl.
>
>> though it already exists for
>> quite a while (very low frequency). I wonder if the question, which  
>> I have
>> put in my last post, would better be posted there instead of OWL- 
>> DEV. Can
>> you please clarify for what kind of discussion this other group is  
>> intended,
>> and how it should be distinguished from OWL-DEV?
>
>I think for a great while you are perfectly safe posting to public- 
>owl-dev. That's where OWL 1.1 feedback was requested to be sent, and,  
>as I said, I don't see that the wg has requested otherwise yet. Many  
>wg members actively monitor public-owl-dev (as you know) so even when  
>there is a more specific list, nothing should be lost by posting  
>here. When last call working draft calls are circulated, they will  
>contain directions for where to post your formal last call comments  
>such that they are sure to "count" in the last call review process.  
>Last call of *any* document is at least, I'd guess, 6 months off, so  
>no worries.
>
>I also (speaking still as me, though a me who is a member of the wg,  
>but not *on behalf* of the wg) hope we'll keep an "open to the world"  
>issues list for people to propose issues through.
>
>I'll also take this quick opportunity to thank you for your close and  
>challenging review. Your various comments and discussions are most  
>definitely helping make the documents stronger.
>
>Cheers,
>Bijan.
>

--
Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555

FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 08:41:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:55 GMT