On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 19:16, Uschold, Michael F wrote: > It seems to me that minimally, there should be a summary of known > errors/bugs/problems with OWL that is pointed to in a clear obvious > (i.e. hard to miss) manner in the official OWL document pages. This > current problem would go on that list. > > If there is no mechanism for this to occur, it seems like an oversight. We maintain errata for the Recommendations... http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/errata but we don't promise to maintain WG Notes. Again, from the status section: > "The authors welcome comments on this document, but does not guarantee a > reply or any further action. [...] no commitment is made by the W3C, or > any of its members, regarding future updates." > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/NOTE-owl-xmlsyntax-20030611/ -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Thursday, 19 August 2004 06:56:19 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:15 GMT