- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:54:24 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
>
> In any case, all we need to overcome this particular problem is to
> make
> an internal editor's draft immediately after the WD and have WG member
> organizations make comments against that inside the WG.
why do it ass-backwards like that? Why not do an internal editors
draft NOW and then get the WG comments registered BEFORE we represent
it as a consensus document of the WG? That would have the nice
feature of being able to answer questions from people in our
organizations and elsewhere with solid answers instead of "Oh, we
haven't discussed that yet", "Oh, that might get taken out later,"
"Gee, I never realized that" and other such helpful things...
Probably wouldn't delay things much, and would make it clear we are
publishing in good faith (and we wouldn't need a State of the
Document that was full of weasel words).
I don't see where taking due caution within the WG is a bad thing,
and still would like to hear a good argument for doing things
differently in this case.
-JH
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 13:54:40 UTC