Re: A thought on fragments and rec-track

Carsten Lutz wrote:
>  And it should also be said that a lot of input from 1)
> went into the original proposal of OWL 1.1 that the WG started off
> with.
> 

I remain frustrated that this input has not been carried forward in a 
use case and requirements document. As is, it is a private mantra 
amongst some in the group that the OWL 1.1 design is based on real use 
cases - but there appears to be no easily accesible audit trail that 
exposes that.

Jeremy