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

Re: cooling-off periods

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:34:37 +0100
Message-ID: <471DC02D.9090006@hpl.hp.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
> Subject: Re: cooling-off periods
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 17:41:13 +0100
> 
>> Peter noted:
>>
>> 	PROPOSED: Publish Structural Specification, Formal Semantics,
>> 	RDF Mapping documents as first public WDs in the next few weeks
>> 	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2007.10.24/Agenda
>>
>> I take Jim as opposing that proposal, and given the chairs' decision to 
>> cancel the previous decision in this area, I would also oppose this 
> 
> Somehow I missed this decision of the chairs.  Could you or anyone else
> point to its source?


Looking, I can see this is partly interpretation:

In:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Oct/0123


Alan responded to my 0120, seconding Jim's 0110:

[[
Jeremy Carroll wrote:
 > 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 essentially agree with you.
]]

procedurally I took this as Jim objecting to the resolution on 
procedural grounds, I seconded Jim's objection, and Alan agreed to the 
objection. I note now that the record is less formal than that.

It would probably help if the chairs clarify whether the decision holds 
or not.

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 09:35:05 GMT

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