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 14:09:03 +0100
Message-ID: <471CA0EF.1080700@hpl.hp.com>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
CC: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org

Jim Hendler wrote:
> p.s. It is generally frowned upon for organizations who participate in a 
> WG to comment on drafts after publication, rather than in the WG 
> (because comments after a publication have a higher requirement for 
> tracking, etc.)  - so again, time to be sure is important.

This is a good point.

If we seek public comment, and generate comments on the comment list 
that we could have had in the WG, they require more admin overhead.

If we seek public comment, and don't get any comments, then the 
discussion is largely moot

The point of earlier WDs is two-fold:

a) to generate comments which would not come from the WG, because the WG 
is only a narrow cross-section of the population

b) to help the world know what direction we are going in

Documents which contain too much non-consensus material do not help 
either of these.

Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 13:09:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:59 UTC