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

Re: New draft for JC5

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 22:49:48 -0400
Message-ID: <29af5e2d0905171949m3ea2f59cl13cfceb4a0165feb@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, schneid@fzi.de, public-owl-wg@w3.org
I concur.
-Alan

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Ian Horrocks
<ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> I also agree: the change is essentially editorial, and you discussed and
> agreed it at last week's teleconf.
>
> I changed "have changed" to "will change" as suggested by Peter. I am happy
> for the response can be sent forthwith.
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
>
>
> On 17 May 2009, at 20:44, Peter F.Patel-Schneider wrote:
>
>> From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
>> Subject: New draft for JC5
>> Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 06:55:55 -0500
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> After my private discussion with TQ concerning the annotation
>>> vocabulary, I have created a new draft
>>>
>>> <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC2_Responses/JC5>
>>>
>>> I believe that we will need to first vote on the renaming of the
>>> vocabulary terms, then do the changes in the documents (several
>>> documents are involved), and only then sent the response to Jeremy. I
>>> think, we can do the changes and sending the response on Wednesday
>>> after the TQ, and do our voting into CR modulo these changes. Given
>>> the (un-official) positive feedback by TQ, this should not lead to
>>> problems.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>> I agree with Bijan and think that you can send it earlier.  (You might
>> want to say "will change" instead of "changed".)  There was discussion
>> at the last TC and I don't see any dissent.  We can officially vote on
>> Wednesday.
>>
>> peter
>>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 02:50:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:12 UTC