Re: revising the semantics PR document

Warning: ill and grumpy

I would value a proposal soon.

When I last understood the status (quite a while back) it looked ok but it 
seems that the comments discussion is interminable. I also understood that it 
was fixing a procedural problem, i.e. due to a misunderstanding Pat promised 
some change to Herman and it did not get into the PR, and now we can suggest 
that that change goes into the Rec. I don't understand why you're still 
talking about ideas rather than proposing text.

I am not 100% convinced that any change is needed really. (Of course, some 
change might be nice). I have a lot of sympathy on the procedural point. I am 
currently ill and grumpy.

Having enough time to allow some feedback from the OWL Semantics editors is 
necessary, which means that Pat and Herman have got to stop talking to one 
another and ideally propose words that both agree. If not I would look to Pat 
to propose something.

It is in some ways selfish to not get your conversation to the point of an 
easily intelligible proposal such as:

"add these three words here, delete this one word etc."

so that others can have a chance to understand it and comment with enough time 
for any further slight changes before we have to vote on Friday.

At this stage I believe any change needs careful review, particular in the 
semantics doc, which has been a source of friction with webont.
If a proposal is not made soon I may feel that the lack of review forces a 
vote against.

Jeremy

Received on Friday, 9 January 2004 15:37:58 UTC