W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Doubts about the proposal to resolve ISSUE-5 [WAS: Teleconference.2008.07.09/Agenda]

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 23:15:51 +0100
Message-Id: <365A560C-0461-473E-80C6-F6969966CB3F@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>

On Jul 8, 2008, at 9:27 PM, Michael Schneider wrote:
> Alright, I can see it. So, I assume

I suggest investigating rather than assuming. :)

> that your current suggestion is to have
> n-aries definitely in the spec /in some form/,

n-ary in a minimal form is currently in the spec. No one has properly  
proposed removing them. So there they are.

> where the details will remain
> to be under development/discussion, right?

N-ary is currently under discussion. I don't anticipate us resolving  
all the details right away. But *this issue* seems mooted.

But I don't really care at all. The chairs requested some advice  
about issue management. I said what I do. Frankly, if I were the  
chairs, I wouldn't put it on the agenda at all and just close it as  
(essentially) withdrawn.

Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2008 22:16:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC