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

Re: Guide tests

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 10:03:43 +0100
Message-ID: <3F82816F.4040809@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Jim:

> I think we should wait to see if these get passed - I'm not yet 
> convinced that these are not passable 


Martin has indicated to me that he would be happy with a single system that 
passes these tests. Other HP developers have heard informally from other 
groups who seem to believe that the current DL profile is implementable, 
which is part of the reason for our surprise.

I take the action to propose reclassifying these to be withdrawn, for now 
at least.


> p.s. Even if these do prove to be too hard to prove consistent at the 
> current time, I don't see how that would change the response to Merry -- 
> proving things consistent is not the only reason to have OWL...
> 


There are choices such as:
- do what Martin suggests and redefine DL downwards to match 
implementations. While this would require a second last call, we could then 
go straight into PR without another CR. (Note: I do not know whether HP 
would want this or not - I have heard arguments both ways).
- add sufficient health warnings to the guide (where 'sufficient' would be 
a topic of debate) and reply again indicating that these are the main 
defence against Martin's concerns about the implementability of DL

I would like to see test results from the heavyweights: Racer, Cerebra etc.

Jeremy

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 05:06:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:02 GMT