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

Re: WOWG: Resolution re: RDF/XML (was Re: Fwd: Re: LANG: owl:import - Two Proposals)

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 09:50:04 -0400
Message-ID: <3D9D9C8C.663C709F@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
CC: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Jim,

Thanks for clarifying things. Does this mean that the chairs are ruling
imports proposal #1 as out of order?

Jeff


Jim Hendler wrote:
> 
> OK, still seems to be some confusion on some people's part as to what
> we resolved where -- what Jeff cited is the log of a telecon which
> informally reported back to the WG what had been resolved at the f2f.
> The f2f log [2] is where these were noted (and put into the record),
> and they were scribed from there into the "official" document which
> is the f2f2 meeting page [1].
> 
> here is the official record of the resolutions as recorded at [1]
> from the transcription of [2] -- both of these documents were
> approved by the group.
> by the way, as Dan pointed out in his message the other day - these
> are official recorded votes, but the chair erred (I admit it) and
> didn't record the dissents.  Those who were opposed are welcome to
> insist on their rights to record dissents (if they still wish to),
> but they will need to let us know who they are.
> 
> Currently the chairs do not see any reason to reopen these resolutions
>   -Jim H (with concurrance of Guus)
> 
> >RESOLUTION: The meaning of an OWL document is conveyed in the RDF graph
> >==> ALL in favour, NO opposed
> 
> ALL = 17 members who attended f2f 2.
> 
> >RESOLUTION: All RDF/XML documents that are equivalent under the RDF
> >Recommendation are equivalent OWL exchange documents
> >==> 14 in favor -- 3 opposed
> >
> >RESOLUTION: The exchange language for OWL is RDF/XML
> >==> 16 in favour
> 
> note - we had 17 voting and 16 in favor, which implies one of the
> above was an abstention
> 
> >
> >RESOLUTION: We intend to produce non-normative presentation syntaxes
> >and their mapping to the exchange syntax
> >==> 16 in favour -- 1 opposed
> >
> >RESOLUTION: The preference of the WG is to produce at least one XML
> >and one frame presentation syntax
> >==> 11 in favour -- 2 opposed
> 
> this implies we had 4 abstentions.
> 
>   -JH
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html (bottom of the web
> page) as recorded in the irc log of that meeting [2]
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/04/09-webont-irc#T14-14-14
> 
> --
> 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)
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 09:50:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT