- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:02:41 +0100
- To: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- CC: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk
+1 I feel me and michael have been more discussing whether or not the full related issues are sensible issues rather than the best resolutions. Jeremy Michael Schneider wrote: > Hi Alan! > > I think we should talk about this principle in general. In the past, since > this "raise quietly" rule has been introduced, it happened several times > that issues got almost /not/ opened, simply because there were many people > who did not have any idea what these issues are about, while there were one > or two other people who opposed to them. > > I would rather prefer to have a discussion /before/ the first telco. An > issue should get into the "open" state, if it is not non-sensical. If most > people do not have any clue about an issue, then such an issue may easily > happen to be regarded as non-sensical by most. > > Just my opinion. > > Cheers, > Michael > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] >> On Behalf Of Alan Ruttenberg >> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 4:55 PM >> To: OWL Working Group WG >> Subject: Raised but not yet accepted issues >> >> >> Issues 110 through 122 are current in status RAISED. Ian and I are >> discussing which of these issues to accept at the moment, so we would >> appreciate if there not be discussion of them on the WG email list >> until we have decided. >> >> Thank you, >> Alan >> >
Received on Monday, 21 April 2008 16:04:44 UTC