W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2008

RE: ISSUE-120 (broken OWL 1 Full semantics): Fixing the inconsistency of OWL 1 Full will break perfect backwards compatibility

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:55:55 +0200
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A08BDA8A@judith.fzi.de>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "OWL Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>Michael Schneider wrote:
>> /I/ agree. But let's see what others think. My idea of processing this
>> was:
>>   1) Raise the issue yesterday.
>>   2) Open the issue on Wednesday.
>>   3) Tell in next week's agenda that this issue is planned to be
>> This would suffice to get most people be aware of it. But if you think
>this is
>> exaggerated, then we might not even open it on Wednesday...
>We have a lightweight process for editorial issues, and I am tentatively
>advocating that this should be used for this issue.

Ah, but I believe that this isn't applicable in this case, since there doesn't 
exist an OWL 2 Full document at the moment.


Received on Monday, 21 April 2008 13:56:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:04 UTC