- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:22:05 -0500
- To: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com>
- Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Our final conclusion was that we will leave these in and respond to Jeremy that they are justified by the note. -Alan On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com> wrote: > 1) I'm looking at the log on IRC and see that there has been some > discussions about the NF&R. > Has the schedule for discusssion about non LC documents been modified > ? Are you in advance ? late ? > > 2) I see Bijan's comment "Throw it away!" > and later : "The use cases right? I'm strongly against them" > after Alan's:"The document is called "New Features and Rationale" > > Since I was not on the phone, and it's clear from the record on IRC, > could you please elicit what you were talking about and what "it" > refers to "in through it away"? > work on N-ary? NF&R ? the comment ? > > 3) I don't know if this discussion was related to N-ary or not. > Concerning N-ary and related UCs, FYI I asked aothors of the technical > spec whether I should leave it or not in the NF&R and was replied that > I should leave it. > " I guess that n-ary will indeed happen as a note, so there is > probably no need to EdNotes in your document". > > > -- > Christine > >
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2009 18:22:54 UTC