- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:22:14 +0100
- To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
It was resolved at the last telecon that *by the first f2f* we would publish as first public working drafts (1stWD) roughly the following three OWL 1.1 documents: Structural Specification Formal Semantics RDF Mapping Which, together, comprise the core specification of the language, i.e., they are together sufficient to implement of parsers, reasoners, editors, etc. and rigorous enough to support interoperability. I imagine we will transition *all* the OWL 1.1 specs to W3C space fairly soon. That doesn't make them WDs. Generally, such versions are called "Editor's drafts" and they are not intended to reflect *any* general will of the WG. Working Drafts *do not* signal that the WG endorses all aspects (or *any* aspects) of those drafts, but merely that the WG thought they were publication worthy. I propose that we publish these three documents as first public WDs in the next few weeks for the following reasons: 1) It meets the heartbeat requirement and establishes a good publishing pace. 2) It provides a clear transition from the webont.org space to W3C space. People are *continually reviewing* the OWL 1.1 specs. For example, see this thread: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-dev/2007OctDec/ 0074.html> I want to encourage as much feedback as possible and to continue the very open process that OWLED and OWL 1.1 have enjoyed thus far. People should have a clear target for their ongoing review. I know some WG members have qualms about various aspects of the current drafts (e.g., like Jeremey expressed in the Telecon about the RDF Mapping). So will *non-members*. On thing that focuses reviewer attention is WD publication. While we, as a group, are getting up to speed on the documents, we should be encouraging *other people* to do so as well and to make their thoughts about the documents know to us. This is why I object to the whole notion of first doing an "internal review" as suggested by Vipul during the telecon. We want lots of feedback *now*, before we start mucking with the documents as a group. We want that feedback to be ongoing. And, as I said, the documents are already public, with a year and a half's worth of effort trying to get people to look at them :) Remember, that we have significant existing implementations (TopBraid Composer, Protege4, OWLSight, Pellet, FaCT++, etc.) which use these documents. So saying very clearly, "HEY, we're starting work on these documents! Pay attention!", (which is what the FPWD publishing event says very clearly) is wise. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 18:21:13 UTC