- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:57:58 -0500 (EST)
- To: hendler@cs.rpi.edu
- Cc: alanruttenberg@gmail.com, public-owl-wg@w3.org
But what possible future work is there to be done on this topic? I can't think of anything. There have been multiple email messages on the issue, describing why conflating owl:Class and rdf:Class is not something to be done in OWL. Given this, why should the issue be POSTPONED instead of being directly CLOSED? peter From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> Subject: Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-55 as postponed Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:45:49 -0500 > FWIW, my understanding is that from the point of view of this WG > there's very little difference - the issue is "dealt with" and not > discussed further (unless something new comes along or etc., but > that's true of a closed issue as well) - the main difference is the > signal it sends externally - by Postponing we suggest to the > community that this is an issue to work on and to revisit in the > future, and as such I endorse doing it in this case > -JH > > > On Jan 8, 2008, at 2:23 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > > > What is the difference between POSTPONING an issue versus simply > > CLOSING > > the issue in this WG? (The reasoning I am asking is that I am unclear > > as to whether there is any technical or resource reason why this issue > > should be postponed instead of closed.) > > > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider > > Bell Labs Research > > > > From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> > > Subject: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-55 as postponed > > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 00:22:44 -0500 > > > >> Following a discussion with Ian, in which we acknowledge Peter's > >> comment below and subsequent discussion on the mailing list, and > >> Jim's desire to postpone this issue, Ian and I propose that we close > >> the issue by postponing it, noting Peter's comment. > >> > >> -Alan > >> > >> On Dec 16, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> > >>> It appears to me that ISSUE-55 asks for a solution that eliminates > >>> the differences between rdfs:Class and owl:Class, or a statement as > >>> to why this is not a good idea. There have already been statements > >>> that say why rdfs:Class and owl:Class are different. > > > > "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 Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:24:06 UTC