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

Re: Consensus on ISSUE-73 (was Re: Universal Property)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:25:40 +0000
Message-ID: <4790E114.5050205@hpl.hp.com>
To: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
CC: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

Michael Schneider wrote:
> Please for my education:
> 
>   <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#FormalObjection>
> 
>   "A Formal Objection to a group decision is one that the reviewer requests 
>   that the Director consider as part of evaluating the related decision 
>   (e.g., in response to a request to advance a technical report). Note: 
>   In this document, the term "Formal Objection" is used to emphasize 
>   this process implication: Formal Objections receive Director
> consideration."
> 
> I do not really understand what exactly the director (TimBL ?) will / can /
> should do in such a case. Can anyone answer, or better, give an example of a
> previous formal objection and how it was handled?
> 
> Thanks,
> Michael
> 


At various points (e.g. transition from Last Call to Candidate Rec) the 
work of the group is reviewed by the director (which is a role, usually 
played by TimBL, but in some meetings the director role is played by 
someone else I believe).

The director can uphold the objection, and refer the work back to the group

http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#return-to-wg
[[
    2. The Director requires the Working Group to address important 
issues raised during a review or as the result of implementation 
experience. In this case, Director MAY request that the Working Group 
republish the technical report as a Working Draft, even if the Working 
Group has not made substantive changes.
]]

Jeremy
Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 17:26:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 18 January 2008 17:26:04 GMT