Re: Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation

Deborah L. McGuinness wrote:

>I made the word changes you suggested to the overview document that 
>were not already in the editors draft.
>I did not make the "members" to "participants" change since there 
>are some people who are members of the working group although I have 
>never seen them participate.   (I did made the working group to 
>Working Group change.)
>I will ask internally for one consistent phrasing for the last 
>paragraph within all of the working group documents.

"Participant" is the W3C Process Document term used instead of "member"
to differentiate from "W3C Members." I ought to have mentioned that.

http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/policies.html

>The Overview document update is in its usual editors draft location -
>http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverview.htm
>
>Concerning the paragraph in the Guide section you mention below, I 
>can rewrite it but I had never heard of  "IANA  reserved sites per 
>RFC 2606" before. I do need some examples in that section and could 
>provide more description and drop the URLs for which I can not 
>control persistance if that is preferable.
>Are you suggesting taking the functional url example - 
>http://wine-portal.com/ - out of the text and putting in
>non functional url you mention wine-portal.example.com  that has the 
>appropriate naming?   This means that people could not click through 
>to the site and would just mean I need to do a bit more description 
>in the example.

Yes, that's exactly right. Thanks very much. (The reasons for this
request are one non-RFC domain in another spec causing harm when it
changed hands, and a domain that is something of a surprise, that was
used in the CSS1 Recommendation.) If can help let me know.

Best wishes,
-- 
Susan Lesch           http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/
mailto:lesch@w3.org               tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    http://www.w3.org/