W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > November 2004

RE: meeting record: 2004-11-18 SWBPD telecon

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:37:50 -0800
To: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000501c4d337$063a69d0$d9d4fea9@stanford.edu>

> Hi Holger,
> I wondering if you are referring to something I said on the 
> telecon.  I couldn't tell because you didn't give a reference 
> to where you read the statement concerned.  If it was me and 
> I was interpretted as suggesting that there is a bug in 
> Protégé I mispoke; I meant that we are having a problem with 
> Protégé but haven't yet determined for certain whether it is 
> a problem with Protégé or us.
> In any case I agree with you; those of us who benefit from 
> the efforts of those who provide high quality free software 
> such as Protégé owe a duty to report issues back to the 
> developers.  Having been on the receiving end of some less 
> than helpful bug reports, I also think we owe have a duty to 
> be as helpful as possible and try to isolate the simplest 
> circumstances in which the bug occurs.

Thanks, Brian.  Indeed it's crucial for projects like Protege
(and Jena) to get user feedback.  The software has become so complex
that the programmers and local users alone are not sufficient for
detecting all remaining issues.  The Protege community has shown
to be extremely helpful in the past, and a glimpse at the protege-owl
mailing list indicates that it has become a forum not only for bug
reports but many other, more general, OWL/RDF issues as well.

You have in the meantime sent many messages and questions to our
lists, and they helped us resolve some problems, and understand
user's difficulties.

Kind regards
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2004 21:38:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:40 UTC