Re: cooling-off periods

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: cooling-off periods
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:34:37 +0100

> 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

I presume that you mean that the decision has been reopened.

peter

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 12:41:06 UTC