that makes great sense - your a wise man Jeremy... On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Jim Hendler wrote: >> +1 to needing better discussion of reqs. I don't however think >> there is a hidden agenda, I think the agendas are clear -JH > > I didn't mean to suggest a hidden agenda in a negative way, more > that each participant in the WG speaks with different end-users of > OWL, (both directly and indirectly) who motivate us each to argue > for what we argue for. > > Then an issue that I might express as "OWL Full compatibility" is > perhaps not entirely a technical issue, but more about supporting > HP's customer base ... and equally what might be expressed as > 'decidability' might actually be more about supporting certian > bioscience customers. > > i.e. we talk with our customers, we understand their needs in terms > of our theoretical constructs, we then rearticulate those needs to > the WG, but only in terms of the theoretical constructs, whereas > the original customer requirements might be revealing > > Jeremy > > > > > > > "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?." - Albert Einstein Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler Tetherless World Constellation Chair Computer Science Dept Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 18:19:01 UTC