- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:03:56 -0400 (EDT)
- To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com> Subject: Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-57: errata on OWL 1.0 documents Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:47:03 +0100 > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > I propose to close ISSUE-57 as none of the problematic pieces of > > the OWL 1.0 documents survive in the OWL 2 documents. > > peter > > > > No. > > While peter is correct in the observation, the issue also lists a number > of comments which might merit errata against the OWL 1 docs, and I think > this group should at some point consider them, and make errata on the > OWL 1 docs as required. > > i.e. we have some obligation for on-going maintenance of the OWL1 specs, > even though our primary task is OWL2. Is approving errata for the OWL 1 documents in our scope of operations at all? I was assuming that it was not. > Jeremy peter
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2008 16:07:31 UTC