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

Re: Web Ontology Language (OWL)?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 15 Nov 2002 12:42:19 -0600
To: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
Cc: W3C Web Ontology WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1037385740.10254.3639.camel@dirk>

On Fri, 2002-11-15 at 12:20, Leo Obrst wrote:
> 
> Many of our documents have the title: "Web Ontology Language (OWL) ...".
> Did we make a decision to NOT expand the acronym correctly?

I thought we decided that was the correct expansion,
or that we delegated to the editors or some such,
but upon review of the records, I'm compelled to
agree: the published WDs conflict with our
decision record:


"RESOLVED: We will call the language OWL (Ontology
Web Language)"
 -- Minutes 3rd January 2002
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jan/0033.html

("How did he find that?" you might ask; well, I remembered
we talked about the name at the 1st ftf; so I
went to the history section of the WG homepage
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/#L109
and reviewed the records of the Jan 2002 ftf.
Didn't find it there, but checked the telcons
following it, and bingo, there it is.)

I kinda like the way the WDs are, so I'm interested in
re-opening that decision. Hm... is the fact that
the WDs are now published and I (among others) like
it sufficient new information to revisit the
decision, Mr. Chair? Or shall we instruct the editors
to fix the WDs w.r.t. our decision record?

> Thanks,
> Leo

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 15 November 2002 13:42:44 GMT

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