- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:07:33 -0400
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
if it isn't clear already - I'd support, as does Jeremy, Option 3 over option 2. I wouldn't support option one at this time -JH On Oct 22, 2007, at 12:21 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > > We are meant to publish something by early January at the latest. > > On the table we have a proposal that we basically publish the three > member submission docs. > > Given that Jim and Deb both found that the lack of e-mail > discussion was a problem - I wanted to go back to square one and > try listing options - and seeing which of these options had some > clear support. > > > Option 1: > (from telecon - with clear support) > Publish member submission documents, with disclaimer indicating > that while this are the focus of our discussion they are not yet > 'consensus' documents - > amendment from HP: perhaps not RDF Mapping > > Option 2: > (variant of option 1) > Publish member submission documents but only those parts for which > we already have consensus, with stubs where we don't have consensus > yet. > > I would expect this to emphasis subproperty chains and QCRs as the > two main new consensus features > > I doubt that there would be enough consensus over any part of the > RDF Mapping doc to make it worth publishing. > > Option 3: > My proposal from the telecon, dropped due to no obvious support at > the meeting: > Start with an OWL 1.1 requirements doc. > This would have the advantage of taking the possible readership of > a FPWD with us; as opposed to the highly technical member > submission docs, which are likely to only be meaningfully read by a > tiny elite. > > Are there other suggestions ... or advocacy? > > While my preferences are option 3, then option 2 then option 1 - at > the telecon I got the distinct impression that there was no support > for anything other than option 1. I am happy to help advocate > something else - but not in a minority of one. > > > 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, 22 October 2007 18:10:20 UTC