Re: progress on OWL going to Rec

I found the two missing references (in Syntax) and added them to
Manchester.  Still missing is a solution to the changes link.

peter


From: "Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Subject: Re: progress on OWL going to Rec
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:54:15 -0400 (EDT)

> The Manchester Syntax document has three broken internal links:
> 1 from the part on recent changes and two from the mime stuff (to
> references). 
> I don't know what to do to fix the recent change link.
> I don't know which references are needed for the mime stuff.
> 
> 
> peter
> 
> 
> From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
> Subject: progress on OWL going to Rec
> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:39:21 -0500
> 
>> 
>> The date has slipped slightly, but I think we're still basically on
>> track.  Expected publication date is next Tuesday (the first day the
>> ISWC conference track).
>> 
>> Please keep checking drafts, now at and linked from:
>>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-overview-20091027/
>> 
>> Send e-mail to the list if you make any changes or see any problems that
>> we should fix before publication.  In particular, I bet the color-code
>> diff and the changelog don't always agree.  :-)
>> 
>> My TODO list:
>>    - change "Latest Version" to be "Latest Version of OWL" and "Latest
>>      Version of OWL 2", as per http://www.w3.org/2005/05/tr-versions
>>    - add notes, as discussed, to OWL 1 documents, on publication day
>>    - maybe do something about hosting/archiving test suite on w3.org
>>    - maybe try to make the XHTML a more HTML friendly
>> 
>> I'm not expecting to do anything more on this until Monday evening, as I
>> have other obligations, and I think I've done my bits.
>> 
>>    -- Sandro
>>

Received on Friday, 23 October 2009 20:37:57 UTC