W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > June 2003

RE: Response to QA comments, Comment on QA draft

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:03:31 +0200
To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDMELECBAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>

> This might be an enormous rathole.  If there is disagreement about
> this, let's not get sucked in purely on account of extensibility being
> one of the QA guidelines.
>

Personally I suspect it is a rathole.

One of my headline comments was that the QA stuff seemed targetted at mature
areas.
These will have had experience of inappropriate extensions; which can be
made illegal; and appropriate extensions which can be blessed individually
or generically.

I don't believe that the DAML+OIL experience gives us enough to go on
vis-a-vis extensions to make the right call; so let's be quiet.

Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2003 10:03:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT