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

Re: Agenda request: Test LC vote

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 14 May 2003 10:15:06 -0500
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1052925306.20121.489.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-05-14 at 03:40, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> Guus, Jim
> 
> I am hoping that we will be able to move to a Last Call vote on Test tomorrow.
> 
> I will provide an updated version later today including changes from the 
> review comments.
> 
> I believe that before the vote we should consider the following:
> 
> 1) approving more tests that Ian can now execute
> I will send a formal proposal message
> 
> 2) a double-check that what I have written about datatypes is what we want
> I will send a summary after I have explicit text to vote on.

2.5) let's take out the "complete OWL DL consistency checker"
conformance clause.

More formally, for tomorrow's agenda:

On the basis of the new information from this review comment

  Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 15:18:27 +0100 
  Subject: OWL Comment: have long CR period for OWL, or move owl:oneOf, owl:haveValue to OWL Full
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003May/0046.html

I propose to reconsider our decision of 10 January:

 RESOLVED: that the OWL test document shall specify conformance of
 consistency checkers {Lite, DL, Full} x {Incomplete, Complete}.
  -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf5.html#Test

I think maybe that record is buggy; we knew in January
that we weren't shooting for a "complete full consistency checker"
sticker.

But more to the point: it's not clear to me that there's
a market for a "complete OWL DL consistency checker" either.
And the main reason for a conformance clause/sticker is
to catalyze a market segment.

So let's take it out of the test spec before we go to last call.


> 3) a quick run through of the most significant changes from this week review 
> (and most significant review comments that I did not accept)
>
> If (2) or (3) fails we may need to not have the vote; or they may result in 
> minor editorial actions prior to publication. (1) would result in an 
> editorial action prior to publication.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 11:17:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:00 GMT