W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > December 2007

Re: issues being discussed: REPORTED vs ACCEPTED

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 15:44:47 +0000
Message-Id: <36B6479B-2CDF-40F1-AF48-B0F186C6EC1E@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>

Most issues are now either ACCEPTED, REJECTED, RESOLVED or POSTPONED  
(the latter 3 categories all being for closed issues); the few  
remaining REPORTED issues are cases where we are waiting for some  
clarification before deciding whether to accept.

Can issue posters please respect the conventions outlined in [1].

After a new issue is added to the list the chairs will decide whether  
to accept it. Hopefully this will be done in a more timely manner now  
that the initial flurry of issues has been dealt with.

Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Issues

On 30 Nov 2007, at 16:04, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
>
> I thought that we were following the convention that when an issue  
> is first added to the issues list it is "REPORTED", and discussion  
> is limited to clarification.
>
> I believed that the chairs were gradually deciding which issues to  
> mark as "ACCEPTED" at which point more free-ranging discussion  
> might take place.
>
> If we have been following this convention it has been more followed  
> in the breach.
>
> e.g. As far as I can see we have established that there are  
> differences of opinion about the metamodel and ISSUE-82 is, indeed,  
> an issue.
>
> I believe we have (informally) agreed that the editors will reflect  
> this appropriately in the appropriate document.
>
> Until the chairs are happy to declare the issue fully open, by  
> marking it as ACCEPTED, I have been trying not to muddy the waters  
> further by making any comment.
>
> (Obviously shortly after an issue has been raised it can be helpful  
> for some comments so we know who stands where, and roughly why ...)
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 2 December 2007 15:44:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:29 GMT