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

Re: WOWG: Documents to review (all members - deadlines included)

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:06:04 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f0cba362b7fed2a@[]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org

At 17:37 +0100 12/30/02, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>On 24 Dec 2002, Jim Hendler wrote:
>Much too little review time, particularly for those of us blessed with
>seasonal holidays.
>>  Apologies that this falls during the winter (summer in the Southern
>>  Hemisphere) break, but it is necessary for us to meet our Last Call
>>  calendar
>Conclusion the calendar is too aggressive.
>>  Only those changed sections will be open for review/discussion at the
>>  face to face
>Any aspect of the documents including omissions (which may have no associated
>section) should be up for discussion in the f2f before last call.
>Also such a restriction permits editors to unilaterally to ignore review
>comments; and then the ignored comments are excluded from the agenda?
>Given the tightness of the review deadline it seems more appropriate to allow
>late comments in a fairly unrestricted fashion.
>Since I suspect this is the first time that many of us are reviewing our
>documents together as a collection I suspect that there will be cross
>document issuettes and unclarities. I find the syntactic restrictions on OWL
>Lite and OWL DL to be one of them: the only documents that are clear that a
>single triple ( <a> <p> "v" . ) is not OWL Lite are the mapping part of
>semantics and Test Cases. This is not listed anywhere as a change from
>Daml+Oil, despite it being one that has significant practical impact.
>I suspect we need some process for tracking such issuettes.
>The process currently being followed will result in many last call issues. A
>last call issue is significantly more administrative work than a prelast call
>issue. If the WG wishes to have such work then so be it, but I suggest that
>it would be better to improve our docs before last call.

  we appreciate the deadlines, but it's not like we haven't been 
pointing out for a long time that this was coming, and all our docs 
went out in pre-LC WDs long enough ago (and comments and reviews have 
been solicited all along).  The issues you bring up do need to be 
addressed, but don't necessarily need the time of the whole WG - many 
of them are best dealt with in high bandwidth communication between 
reviewer and editor - which the f2f agenda has been designed to 
  Also, the comments we've asked to have finalized by Jan 2 are the 
comments on the documents themselves -- the identification of 
"cracks" between the documents and the fixes thereto will be 
addressed at the f2f, again, one hopes without the need of everyone 
in the WG working on each of them.    There will be plenary time for 
any "major" issues that come up (and the one you've brought up about 
Lite/DL will likely be one of those).
  The deadlines we're looking at could be movable, but we;d prefer to 
shoot at what we have -- again, we're up against process deadlines 
and while delays are possible, they also add risk.
  Please, please try to get your comments on the record before Jan 2 - 
any comments raised by then (such as the one you mention above) must 
be dealt w/by the editors before we would approve LC, but we have to 
have some finite limit, or we will never be done until the language 
is "perfect" - an unachievable goal.
  So we'd like to stick with what we have, and do our best

Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Monday, 30 December 2002 12:06:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:49 UTC