W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Agenda TC 18/02/2009

From: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:22:37 +0100
Message-ID: <b0ed1d660902230222r43672d99jf9a50a96fd4447ee@mail.gmail.com>
To: Héctor Pérez-Urbina <hector.perez-urbina@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Given this full Agenda, tight schedule, and late time on Day 2 (night
in EU), its' highly probable that there will not be much time left on
the non LC documents at the F2F (similar to Agenda of telecons).
Thus to gain time, find below a point on state of NF&R and a proposal
to allow progress on it:

At this time:
- I have addressed non LC comments, nearly all editorial (the only one
still to be fixed is the UC#3, example).
- I have drafted a new section to address issues merged with LC
comments [1]   (slightly revised since my email announcing it to the
list).

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/New_Features_and_Rationale#Other_Design_Choices_and_Rationale

Since, as shown by many comments, NF&R seems rather helpful to
approach the more technical core docs of the spec, it'd be nice to
progress on it in parallele to LC docs, so as to be ready at the time
of next publication of (present) LC docs.

Therefore to avoid us to be stuck and have to proceed in urgency (as
previously), is it possible
1) to get volunteers to review the new drafted section "Designs" [1]
2) to agree at the F2F on a list of items for this section:
along the dicussions on LC, a few additional topics might be desired
to be included, for example such as global restrictions, clarification
on names etc.

This would make it possible to have NF&R be ready quite soon.

Thanks

Christine

2009/2/17 Héctor Pérez-Urbina <hector.perez-urbina@comlab.ox.ac.uk>:
> Hi,
>
> This is a preliminary version of this week's teleconference:
>
>    *  Admin
>          o Roll call
>          o Agenda amendments?
>          o PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (11 February)
>          o Action items status
>                + Pending Review Actions
>                      # Action 278 Make the necessary changes to the
> rdf:text document, given the response to MD1
> (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/MD1) / Jie Bao
>                      # Action 272 Produce a wiki page to consolidate
> new features/rationales from email responses that got mixed into LC
> comments / Christine Golbreich
>                + Due and overdue Actions
>                      # Action 264 Talk to Tim Redmond about his lc
> comment / Alan Ruttenberg
>                      # Action 279 Make the necessary changes to the
> documents given the response to MD1
> (http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/MD1) / Bijan Parsia
>                      # Action 288 Propose a change on the documents /
> Bijan Parsia
>                      # Action 287 Respond to rm1 along these lines of
> procedural problems / Michael Schneider
>                      # Action 285 Send out response to md1 comment /
> Bijan Parsia
>                      # Action 283 Add an ontology header and a
> comment to each of the test cases from WebOnt that are prevented from
> being syntactically OWL 2 DL only be the absence of this header and
> create content for errata on webont tests / Michael Smith
>                      # Action 284 Send a response to jh1 comment /
> Bijan Parsia
>          o F2F5 (23-24 February, 2009)
>                + Will definitely go ahead
>                + Agenda now available
>                + Please add attendance status to People page
>    * Last Call Comments (see public-owl-comments and Responses to
> Last Call Comments)
>          o Responses ready to send
>                + ZW2a points 2,5 & 6 (OWL vocabulary & editorial
> affecting Mapping to RDF)
>                + JR8 (confusion about role of OWL/XML)
>                + JW1 (editorial affecting Mapping to RDF)
>                + FH5 (Wanting ontology annotations to name profile/Issue 111)
>                + RM1 (Functional datatype properties)
>                + MS4 (Entailment differences in OWL DL and Full)
>          o Draft responses available for comment
>                + SS1a & SS1b (Hard to select/use profiles & various editorial)
>                + TR1 (imports)
>                + FH4 (anonymous individuals and blank nodes)
>                + JR7 (imports closure)
>                + JR5 (Sameness and Namedness)
>                + MD1 (Unicode)
>          o Comments that may require policy decisions
>                + FH2, SWD1 (Use of OWL/DL/Full)
>                + RM1 (Datatype properties should be functional)
>                + BP1 (Axiom hiding)
>                + BP2 (Redesign XML syntax)
>                + RIF1 (Disjoint numeric datatypes)
>                + RIF2 (Set of supported datatypes)
>    * Test Cases
>          o Problems with approved test cases?
>          o Progress on tool support, e.g., for "species validation"?
>          o How to organize related tests - e.g. same input but
> different results for DL versus Full/RL (e.g. punning/sameas)
>          o PROPOSED: Approve some/all of the test cases currently in
> the test queue
>    * Plans for non-LC documents
>    * Coordination with RIF
>          o Organization
>          o LC comments on rdf:text
>          o Datatypes - Sandro update
>    * Features "At-Risk" (just a reminder)
>          o owl:rational support
>          o xsd:decimal precision
>          o owl:dateTime name
>          o rdf:XMLLiteral support
>          o OWL 2 RL Datatypes
>    * Additional other business
>    * RDF Semantics
>
> Regards,
>
> Héctor
>
>



-- 
Christine
Received on Monday, 23 February 2009 10:23:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 23 February 2009 10:23:16 GMT