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

Re: Visual Rendering of OWL ontologies?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 03:49:32 +0000
Message-Id: <3A304387-DDD0-45E1-BA24-21D7EDA641B3@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org, "Elisa F. Kendall" <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
To: Anne Cregan <Anne.Cregan@nicta.com.au>

On Nov 12, 2007, at 3:38 AM, Anne Cregan wrote:

> Hi Alan,
> Actually I'm not suggesting anything so far, I just wanted to open  
> it up for discussion. It may well be that if there is an activity  
> to conduct here, it fits better with OWLED
> than with OWL-WG, so apologies if I have not gone about this the  
> right way.
> However I didn't want to pre-judge whether there should be an  
> activity, or what kind
> of an activity it might be.
> Bijan and Ivan recommended to me to shift this page to the official  
> WG wiki (I guess that
> indicates they think it should be an OWL-WG concern rather than an  
> OWLED one?)

Not necessarily. Just that since you raised it in the OWL-WG as a  
thing for the OWL-WG to consider (and said you were posting it on the  
OWLWG wiki :)), the right place to "do work on it" is the OWL WG  
wiki. If the WG doesn't take up that work, then whether it is  
something for OWLED is up to the OWLED steering committee (and a  
future meeting).

> Again apologies if I have gone about things the wrong way.  I am  
> relatively new to the group
> and appreciate the clarification.
> Just so I can be clear on the distinction - should I take it then  
> that the OWL-CNL task force has no official
> status within the OWL-WG?

That is correct. OWLED, in general has no formal connection with the  
W3C. Just some overlap in membership. None of the OWLED Task Forces  
have anything to do with WG TFs, except, perhaps, subject  matter.

Received on Monday, 12 November 2007 03:49:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC