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

[Fwd: Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation]

From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:36:59 -0700
Message-ID: <3F6DE1BB.5000602@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: Webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
since some of our members have not participated as far as I can tell, i 
am not clear that the wording change she suggests below -

s/members of this working group/participants in this Working Group/

is appropriate.  
This seems like an internal administrative decision that all editors should follow 
both in terms of the wording and the listing of the people.
I thought it was less disputable to state membership and then use the 
listing on the site.
If we list participants then it seems like someone should figure out
who has actually participated (and that may also include people who are
not members now but have participated in the past).
I can not make that complete listing but will use it if someone makes it.

Deborah



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation
Resent-Date: 	Sun, 21 Sep 2003 02:26:38 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: 	public-webont-comments@w3.org
Date: 	Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:26:32 -0700
From: 	Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
To: 	public-webont-comments@w3.org



Hello,

These are minor editorial comments for your OWL Candidate
Recommendation [1,2,3,4,5,6], I hope in time for your deadline.

Overview [1]
s/publically/publicly/
s/members of this working group/participants in this Working Group/
s/Grahm/Graham/
s/emposed/imposed/
s/indivual/individual/
s/simililarly/similarly/

For the References section, there is an example here:
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-section

---

Guide [2]
s/intepreted/interpreted/
s/likeliehood/likelihood/
s/modificatons/modifications/
s/subClsssOf/subClassOf/
s/Workng/Working/
s/Ontolgoy/Ontology/
s/URI's/URIs/
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

For the References section, there is an example citation here:
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-section

Links outside, like rdf:ID need a reference and section. There is an
example here:
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#linking-within

Section 7.2 most likely needs to be rewritten to point only to IANA
reserved sites per RFC 2606 (example.org, example.com and example.net
or if you need evocative names, e.g. wine-portal.example.com). The
examples and links here could be omitted. If they can't be omitted and
you can assure persistence then they can be references. If I can be of
assistance please let me know and I will help rewrite this. I am sorry
to have to say this at CR.

    A number of sites exist today that call themselves wine portals.
    Google for example, provides 152,000 matches for the query "wine
    portal". One of the top matches, a site called "Wine-Portal.com",
    provides access to a number of sites. Many sites claiming to be
    wine portals are mostly informational sites. For example,
    wine-portal.com's first featured site, called 'cork cuisine'
    (www.corkcuisine.com/), provides information about matching wines
    and foods, wines as gifts, etc. Another site billed as "the
    Internet Wine Portal" ( www.cyberbacchus.com/) provides a nice
    organization of a substantial amount of wine information on
    numerous topics.

Similarly, links like these should be omitted or made into citations.
wine agent
http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/wineAgent/
listing
http://www.wine.com/search/ea_results.asp?ct=1577&query=zinfandel
Marietta
http://www.b-21.com/marietta/
http://www.mariettacellars.com/welcome.html

---

OWL Reference [3] is beautifully done!
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

---

Semantics and Abstract Syntax [4]
s/discusion/discussion/
s/particulary/particularly/
s/vocabularly/vocabulary/
s/members of the W3C Web Ontology Working Group/participants in the 
W3C Web Ontology Working Group/

---

Test Cases [5]
s/web/Web/
s/web-site/Web site/
s/working group/Working Group/
s/favourable/favorable/
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

---

Use Cases and Requirements [6]
s/web/Web/
s/,,/,/
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

OntoWeb, The Open Directory Project, Agentcities, can be references if
you need to link to them.

In the References section, the work's title should be the link. There
is an example here: http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#ref-section

---

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-features-20030818/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-guide-20030818/
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-ref-20030818/
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-semantics-20030818/
[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-test-20030818/
[6] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-webont-req-20030818/

Best wishes for your project,
-- 
Susan Lesch           http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/
mailto:lesch@w3.org               tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    http://www.w3.org/
Received on Sunday, 21 September 2003 13:39:07 GMT

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