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

Re: [Fwd: Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation]

From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:27:40 -0700
Message-ID: <3F6E17CC.6030604@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Cc: Webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
ok - after susan responded, i moved to participants and am happy with a 
name listing. 
Whenever we do the next update, we might just get one person to do the 
updated name listing that we all should include.

d


Jim Hendler wrote:

> At 10:36 AM -0700 9/21/03, Deborah L. McGuinness wrote:
> 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
>
>
> Deb - I looked where Susan directed us -- she's right.  Participants 
> mean participants in the WG  members generally means W3C members (i.e. 
> the organizations).  So Susan is pointing out that to be consistent 
> w/W3C practice, we should either say "Members of this working group" 
> and then list the organizations (Stanford, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, etc.) 
> or say "Participants in this working group" and then list the 
> individuals.  I prefer the latter.
>  As far as who has participated, there are many people who have come 
> and gone, some participating more than others, but all making some 
> sort of contribution in some way along the process (sometimes via 
> emails to chairs and team that were not shared with all members of the 
> WG).  My instinct is to be inclusive and give everyone the benefit of 
> the doubt.
>  So my preference is to do what Susan suggests (go w/participants).  
> Also, we've had a few more people join - before we move to the next 
> stage, we should update the list to include the new members as well.
>  -JH
>
>
>
>
> -------- 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 <mailto:public-webont-comments@w3.org> 
> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:26:32 -0700 From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org> 
> <mailto:lesch@w3.org> To: public-webont-comments@w3.org 
> <mailto: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/ <http://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/ 
> <http://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 
> <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/
>
>
>-- 
>  
>
> Professor James Hendler                           hendler@cs.umd.edu
> Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies         301-405-2696
> Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.      301-405-6707 (Fax)
> Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742      *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***


-- 
 Deborah L. McGuinness 
 Associate Director Knowledge Systems Laboratory 
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241 
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020 
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705 0941
Received on Sunday, 21 September 2003 17:28:42 GMT

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