W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > March 2005

Re: Review of RDFTM Survey

From: Natasha Noy <noy@smi.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:21:46 -0800
Message-Id: <323eb65406e2d5bbf65d661f531a7273@smi.stanford.edu>
Cc: "SWBPD list" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
To: "Steve Pepper" <pepper@ontopia.net>

Steve,

> First of all, thank you for your very useful review of the
> Survey. I haven't replied yet because I didn't want to preempt
> the discussion at the F2F, but I will certainly get back to
> you with a detailed response.

Unfortunately, I will not be at the f2f. I'll try to call in during the 
RDFTM discussion, but it will be hard for me to do this at the time it 
is scheduled right now (although it seems that the time is going to 
change).  That said, all my comments are in the email, so even if I am 
not there, you have them :)

> | Regardless of the guidance on that, what probably raised a red flag 
> for
> | me was the way it was mentioned. Something like "Garshol sketches 
> some
> | solutions for the tricky cases along the lines of X, which has since
> | been implemented in the Ontopia Knowledge Suite". However, unlike for
> | all the other approaches, there are no details of how these tricky
> | questions are addressed.
>
> Actually, the bullet list following this text *does* provide almost
> all the details. It's rather compact, but it's all there.

So, maybe it is just the matter of wording (the current wording gives 
an impression that there is more under the hood than you present, which 
is not the case) and level of detail then. What you have there now is 
rather terse.

Natasha
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2005 21:21:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:15 GMT