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

Re: Publication proposal discussion summary

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:28:56 +0100
Message-Id: <19C6A704-DE20-4C5F-8333-20450858A9F0@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>

Alan pointed out to me that there was a subsequent version, or  
perhaps alternative versions, put forth by the chairs:

This is referenced by the agenda:

The main difference is in:

	3) We will decide whether to publish some or all of the updated
documents as First Public Working Drafts either shortly before or
during the first F2F meeting.

My proposal is that we decide to publish all 3 documents as soon as  
technically feasible. The strongest version of this proposal that  
seems to have no opposition, and some support from people otherwise  
opposed, is to publish the Formal Semantics document alone as a FPWD  
as soon as possible, and decide closer to the first F2F whether to  
publish initial drafts for review of the other two documents (perhaps  
extensively annotated with issue marking).

If there is, as I believe, consensus on publishing the Semantics  
document now, I still think that has the benefits I described. If the  
chairs would like to put only that part of the question to the group,  
I have no problem with that, though, I'll point out that I don't  
agree with the grounds of most of the opposing points. Indeed, I  
think they are very weak. So my agreement to this change does not  
reflect my being remotely convinced by the arguments as given.  
However, it's clear that enough people are very strongly opposed, for  
whatever reason, that we probably can't get consensus to publish all  
three. And it seems we've spent enough time. So I would propose a 3'  
which is:

	3') We will publish a FPWD of the formal semantics document as soon  
as the technical details are cleared. We will decide whether to  
publish the rest of the core formal documents as First Public Working  
Drafts either shortly before or
during the first F2F meeting.

If people are strongly opposed to this friendly amendment, I urge you  
to just say so. I don't think further elaboration is necessary or  
perhaps even helpful at this point. I'll not strongly press falling  
back to 3.

Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2007 14:27:31 UTC

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