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

Re: significant problem for moving OWL to Last Call

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:40:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030327.114055.122059180.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: herman.ter.horst@philips.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org

The meta-issue here is that
1/ the Last Call version of RDF Semantics has multiple technical
   errors that impact the OWL semantics, and
2/ the RDF Core WG Last Call reconcilliation process is
   a) proceeding slowly (the last editor's draft of RDF Semantics is dated
      26 February 2003),
   b) introducing other changes to the RDF semantics that will have to be 
      mirrored in the OWL semantics, and
   c) going in a way that appears to me will not satisfactorily address all
      the issues that impact the OWL semantics.

I don't really want to hold up the last call for WebOnt because of this,
but I forsee considerable pain if we proceed to last call on the basis of
the RDF Core WG last call.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Lucent Technologies

From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: RE: significant problem for moving OWL to Last Call
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:13:18 +0100

[...]

> [A]s an RDF Core member, my limited understanding of the key role of the
> current semantics editors draft was for you and Herman to make sure you were
> satisfied with it before we go to the next stage.
> 
> I think the level of detail has gone beyond what myself at least, and I
> guess
> other members of the RDF Core WG, feel able to comment on intelligently.
> 
> In particular, my understanding is that if the OWL Semantics is made more
> difficult
> by changes
> suggested in the editors draft, then either
> these changes should be undone, or RDF will probably need a second last call
> to sort them out.
> 
> In summary, I believe RDF core is motivated to sort this out to Peter and
> Herman's satisfaction - and we should put the ball in their court by moving
> to last call on the basis of the RDF last call.
> 
> Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 11:42:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:58 GMT