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

Re: MSM1, RIF1

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:25:57 +0000
Message-Id: <4B087E79-CF98-485D-9D35-67018B5DBCFD@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 18 Mar 2009, at 07:57, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

> In these responses, I would like the phrase "as well as implementation
> experience" removed, as when this was presented I was not convinced
> that the reason cited was compelling.

It seems to have been generally accepted by a significant fraction of  
the working group and thus worth including.

> I'm also concerned about the lack of mention of the expected
> objection. I've asked Ivan for what precedent is, but think in the
> interest of transparency, that there should be some indication that
> this will be contested.

I don't think this is relevant. It's more relevant to include these  
last call comments in the report to the director about the  
forthcoming formal objection so that the director can weigh how  
theses LC comments would be affected by a ruling in favor of the FO.  
If the FO is sustained, the matter is returned to the working group  
and then we would have the job, then, of checking that these people  
would be satisfied.

IOWs, I don't support either change.

Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 08:22:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:10 UTC