W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: Public comments WL1, RAK, OK

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:09:03 -0400
To: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
Cc: "Chris Welty" <cawelty@gmail.com>, "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20081025130903.06271ad9@kiferserv>

Regarding the OK response, FLD also (and importantly) covers logic programming
rules, while KIF/CL does not.

michael


On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 12:32:31 -0400
"Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:

> 
> DaveH and I have a draft that could be reviewed in
> the Tue telecon and sent off soon after:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_WL1
> 
> Based on Sandro's early response, I had prepared this:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_OK
> (I had suggested -- part of -- our response should
> be text for one of our specs, BLD or perhaps FLD)
> 
> And we still have one open one:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_RAK
> 
> -- Harold
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Chris Welty
> Sent: October 14, 2008 10:04 PM
> To: Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)
> Subject: Public comments EP1, WL1, AR2, RAK
> 
> 
> 
> I've created wiki pages for the outstanding public comments.
> 
> EP1 and AR2 are ready to go.  I'll send Thurs. unless I hear otherwise.
> 
> Harold, you and DaveH wanted to respond to WL1.
> 
> Christian, you wanted to respond to RAK.
> 
> -Chris
> 
Received on Saturday, 25 October 2008 17:09:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:57 GMT