- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:02:43 +0000
- To: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
- CC: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>, Vojtech Svatek <Svatek@vse.cz>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Uli Sattler wrote: > > On 15 Feb 2008, at 10:27, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > >> >> Carsten Lutz wrote: >>> And it should also be said that a lot of input from 1) >>> went into the original proposal of OWL 1.1 that the WG started off >>> with. >> >> I remain frustrated that this input has not been carried forward in a >> use case and requirements document. As is, it is a private mantra >> amongst some in the group that the OWL 1.1 design is based on real use >> cases - but there appears to be no easily accesible audit trail that >> exposes that. > > hm, we have definitely not kept them secret/private but desribed them in > various papers. I was not trying to suggest they were secret - more that the audit trail of how the current design relates to the use cases, and what the use cases are, could be more transparent. > Anyway, we could easily move some of our QCR and > subproperty chains use cases/stories/work around design patterns into a > wiki page...would this help? Cheers, Uli I would find that helpful. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 15 February 2008 12:03:09 UTC