W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > December 2002

Re: ISSUE: justifications (postponed)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 11 Dec 2002 11:35:21 -0600
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1039628121.32719.205.camel@dirk>

I don't see this in the issues list nor in
the agenda under pending issue updates.

Maybe the Bristol ftf record wasn't clear enough,
but I thought we already decided to accept
and pospone this issue.

But since it doesn't seem to be in the issues
list, can we please resolve to accept
and postpone it tomorrow?

On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 10:03, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> TITLE: Justifications
> 
> DESCRIPTION: finding proofs is a lot of work;
> once one is found, it can be checked straightforwardly.
> It would be valuable to have an exchange syntax
> to promote interoperability of proof-checking
> systems and to preserve the value of proofs,
> once they're found.
> 
> related issues: 5.13 Internet Media Type for OWL 
>   5.3 Semantic Layering
> 
> RAISED BY: Dan Connolly
> 
> STATUS: Postponed
> 
> REFERENCE: imports discussion at Oct Bristol ftf
>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf4#Issue1
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/10/07-webont-irc#T16-54-25
> 
> RESOLUTION: POSTPONED. while several members
>  of the WG agree this would be valuable, noone
>  argues that it's critical path for this
>  round of deliverables. Discussion of this
>  issue should be taken to www-rdf-logic
>  for the time being.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 12:35:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT