- From: Melanie Courtot <mcourtot@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 09:54:17 -0700
- To: Bijan Parsia <bijan.parsia@manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Samantha Bail <bails@cs.man.ac.uk>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk>, <public-owled@w3.org>
On 2013-08-28, at 9:44 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote: > So, the first thing that has to happen for ORE to merge with OWLED is for ORE to acquire some organisational structure or for us to transition directed into the OWLED organisational structure. We'll need some continuity with the current ORE folks as, well, we have all the stuff :) I think it makes sense to merge if all parties are willing. I don't know the status of the ORE organization, but I found the OWLED one reasonable. Maybe to keep things simple we could just merge the events, and merge the organizing committees if that's agreeable to everybody? > > If OWLED is willing to go to Vienna, then I think we can do a slow merge, starting with a sort of colocation aspect and work toward a new general management structure for the events under the auspices of the community group. I don't know the details of the pros and cons of going to Vienna. It seems there are already quite a few events planned, so while it would be great to co-locate with them, maybe it would be too much happening together? > > If not, then I'd suggest we'd still have at least a mini-ore event at OWLED (perhaps a run of the live event?) and a presentation/advertisment of ORE. It seems everybody who spoke up was in favour of the merge. Maybe allow some time for additional feedback, and put a deadline to early next week to "object or remain silent forever"? Then as a new expanded group we can (1) gather proposals (2) make the location decision. Cheers, Melanie ps: I am not interested in seizing control but I'm happy to help if desired. > > Cheers, > Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2013 16:56:32 UTC