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

Re: (resolution status/documents)Re: minutes for 17 October

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:00:47 +0100
Message-ID: <471C82DF.7090602@hpl.hp.com>
To: public-owl-wg@w3.org


I think it was clear at the meeting that the intent of the resolution 
was that our heartbeat publication would be at least docs (1) and (2), 
essentially unchanged, with any lack of consensus issues addressed in 
SOTD and other notes, rather than in deleting text (which Jim suggests 
as an alternative).

At the meeting, I was less than happy, I floated the idea that 
requirements would make more sense as the heartbeat pub, and got not 
support; and so satisfied myself with the minor change to the 
resolution, which was based on what I understood of the HP position I am 
trying to represent, rather than the issues Jim is raising.

Procedurally I am fully with Jim - any resolution that is made to a 
proposal that was not in the e-mail version of the agenda with the 
(approx) 24 hrs notice, I think should be null-and-void on the request 
of any participant who was not present, or was present but unable to 
consult with their colleagues to have a position to represent (while the 
latter case should become apparent during the telecon. it is conceivable 
that the rep makes an honest mistake in which they believe that the 
proposal is uncontroversial, and then discuss it the next day with their 
colleagues who are horrified).

The purpose of the process is to get consensus of the member 
organizations participating in the WG. In this case, we seem to have 
failed to achieve that, and I think we should void the resolution.

I also think that in general, we should have at least some text drafting 
proprosals, in the agenda 24 hrs before the question will be put.

Obviously this is not necessary for uncontroversial proposals - but you 
really only know if a proposal is controversial or not, if it generated 
controversy!

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 11:01:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:26 GMT