- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:41:50 -0400
- To: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
- Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
I'd support creating a tracking issue for N-Ary if that feels better. As was mentioned, Ian's suggestion was more along the lines of consolidating the issues into one. On the matter of issue-5, while Jeremy is no longer part of the group, the issues he raised were relevant and I don't think they disappear because he isn't a member of the group any more. He's still a W3C member, as is HP. -Alan On Jul 2, 2008, at 11:26 AM, Evan Wallace wrote: > Bijan wrote: >> Of course, issues are just a mechanism for the chairs to manage >> things, but I would suggest that issue-5 be closed based on the >> fact that the raiser has, in effect, withdrawn it (see one of >> jeremy's last email). Thus, there's no one left who owns that, and >> the phraseology is unfortunate. ISSUE-53, on the other hand, has >> an in group owner, has not been withdrawn, and would need an >> answer if we don't adopt at least 3. >> >> Any of the technical issues in ISSUE-5 can be reraised in a better >> context. > > I second Bijan's proposal. While the HP issues with N-ary > datatypes probably did push us to look more > deeply issues with datatypes (computational -vs- numeric), haven't > these initial comments been overtaken > by events? > > -Evan
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2008 15:42:42 UTC