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

Re: WOWG: agenda Sep 19 telecon

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:44:22 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <20020918.134422.44842357.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: connolly@w3.org
Cc: schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl, www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Subject: Re: WOWG: agenda Sep 19 telecon
Date: 18 Sep 2002 12:17:20 -0500

> On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 10:38, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > I am worried that there has been no indication of what should happen in
> > preparation for the upcoming F2F.  I haven't seen any information about
> > which documents will be considered at F2F4, or which topics will be
> > discussed there.
> > 
> > According to what Dan said
> > (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2001Nov/0132.html), 
> > documents should be *finalized* two weeks before a F2F.
> 
> Well, they should be available to everybody by then. They don't have
> to be finalized in the sense that everybody has read and
> agreed to them. Two weeks before the ftf is 24 Sep.
> I'm not aware of any documents that we should be discussing
> at the ftf that are unlikely to be available by 24 Sep.

In the current state of affairs, I consider it unlikely that there will be
an acceptable version of the OWL/RDF semantics document available by 24
September.   I don't know about the testing document, as all we've seen is
the initial proposal by Jeremy.

> >  I'm willing to
> > shave this to a week, but I think that it is necessary to determine which
> > documents will be up for consideration, and what topics are going to be
> > discussed, with at least two weeks of lead time.
> > 
> > I consider this an extremely serious problem.  In my view, most of this
> > week's telecon has to be devoted to preparation for F2F4.
> 
> Assembling the ftf agenda is usually done by the chair offline.
> That's happening; I have seen rough drafts. Maybe they should be copied
> to the WG mailing list.
> But I don't recommend spending telcon time drafting the ftf agenda.

Neither do I.  However, I don't even know which, if any, semantics
documents will be up for discussion at the F2F.  I don't even know if the
F2F is supposed to be devoted to issues or documents.

Given this, I don't know whether I should have been devoting time to
hashing out issues or going over the OWL/RDF semantics document.

peter
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2002 13:44:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:52 GMT