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

Re: semantics: layering...? [was: Next steps (Action: all)]

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:48:54 -0500
Message-Id: <p05101409b8a461f86534@[]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, connolly@w3.org
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
At 5:00 PM -0500 2/28/02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
>Subject: semantics: layering...? [was: Next steps (Action: all)]
>Date: 28 Feb 2002 13:42:38 -0600
>>  I've been studying the layering stuff, but I'm not sure
>>  how to prepare for a telcon discussion of layering.
>>  If you have anything in particular in mind, please let me/us know.
>I'm working on a message about this (and other things).  Expect something


>>  Oh... one thing that would help me is if you and PatH
>>  could summarize the thread you guys had.
>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Feb/0134.html
>>  I didn't follow all of it. Was there any particular result
>>  of the discussion?
>We are still disagreeing.  I *think* that we have differing intuitions as
>to how OWL is supposed to work, which is causing some fundamental
>disagreements as to how the semantics will work.  This is one reason that I
>would like to discuss layering at a telecon.
>>  --
>  > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Peter - don't want to pick on you, more generally using this as an 
example - we (the chairs) have come to realize that telecons are 
probably not the best place to have long discussions of fundamental 
disagreements - better to use the telecon to discuss how to make 
traction on the issue and then to identify a smaller group to be 
develop some sort of strawman proposal for the whole group to react 
to (but with that group's  discussion happening on the mailing list 
so those who need to track it can see what is going on).  When that 
set of folks comes to consensus on a proposal, or at least writes up 
the issue specifically enough for the rest of the group to understand 
why consensus is elusive,  then it is sent to the WG and discussed on 
a telecon.
  btw, one thing I learned recently is that we can schedule other 
telecons, within WOWG or even with non-WOWG folks - so, for example, 
if it was felt that a discussion of layering and related issues 
needed some time at higher bandwidth than email, a special telecon 
could be arranged either for WOWG folks or for some kind of WOWG plus 
others.  Same can be done by chat where that is a better solution 
(i.e. the #webont chat is available 24/7 and any group of folks with 
irc can arrange to meet each other their)
  We do ask that such telecons/chats be logged and sent to the group as a whole
  Anyone wanting to arrange such a thing, let me, Guus and Dan know, 
and we can help work it out.
  -Jim H.

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)
AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland		  College Park, MD 20742
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2002 17:49:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:42 UTC