Re: [Telecon] Call for agenda items: BLD issues

The items from my review that I wasn't completely sure of after the face 
to face were:

(a) The inclusion of slotted terms. We never did discuss why those are 
still in there (even if they are "for free" :-))

(b) rif:subClassOf (##). I know we agreed to keep rif:type (#) for now 
and we previously agreed to put ## in the draft with a framing 
discussion but I'm not clear on whether we are still going to have that 
framing discussion.

(c) rif:text. I don't think there was any disagreement with it that 
needs discussion, it will just be a thing to check before publication.

Dave
-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England

Chris Welty wrote:
> 
> 
> A small clarification:
> 
> There were a number of reviews of the BLD draft posted to the list 
> (which is very good).  Michael, Harold, and Jos did an excellent job 
> sorting through and addressing them, but it is inevitable that something 
> inadvertently "falls through the cracks".  If you posted a review, now 
> is the time to check if your comments have been adequately addressed.  
> This section of the next telecon agenda will be reserved for such 
> discussion.
> 
> -Chris
> 
> Christian de Sainte Marie wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> If you have any remaining issue with the BLD draft that you want the 
>> WG to discuss before publication, please, tell us before Friday night 
>> (Oct. 5), so we can add them on the agenda for the next telecon.
>>
>> Repeat: issues that you think the WG should discuss before 
>> publication. Most editorial comments do not qualify, probably...
>>
>> This is in addition to circulating on the mailing list your 
>> reviews/comments to the editors, of course.
>>
>> CC&S
>>
>>
>>
> 

Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 17:36:09 UTC