- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 17:53:37 +0000
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Bijan Parsia wrote: > >> I have trouble reconciling this with our initial debate about >> publishing WDs and what it means to publish one. Now, perhaps you've >> changed your mind about that, which is fine, but I'm unclear where >> that leaves other then-like-minded people. >> > > I have lost the context about my alleged change of mind ... I don't > believe it matters. > > Ahh - after chatting with Bijan I think I've got it. I believe the 'change of mind' is: - with the technical documents I have expressed concern about possible misrepresenting of consensus etc. - with the UFDs I seem totally unbothered about this risk Of course, there would be some in truth in pointing out that I care a lot more about a document being published which I disagree with, than one being published to which other people disagree with :) Of course, to polish my self-image, I can present that as caring more about disagreements about normative content, than disagreements about 'mere' presentation. With the FPWD of the technical material, I remain of the opinion that it is important to at least adequately document the consensus or lack of consensus around the design. In a FPWD it is likely that sufficiently large disclaimers will suffice. For FPWD of less technical documents, I tend to feel that it is important that they are in sync with some explicit version of the more technical docs - concerning consensus about the style/manner/choice of subject matter .... I'm unclear. Is it possible to have a disclaimer: e.g. one of the fault points appeared to be whether an overview should be a short brief OWL 1.1 member submission style overview, or a longer more detailed OWL 1.0 style overview. Is it possible to put a disclaimer: [[ It is unclear to the WG whether this document would be improved by being briefer/longer. Feedback on this issue is particuarly asked for. ]] Hmmmm .... Jeremy
Received on Monday, 5 November 2007 17:54:04 UTC