- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:09:03 -0400
- To: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
- Cc: "Chris Welty" <cawelty@gmail.com>, "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Regarding the OK response, FLD also (and importantly) covers logic programming rules, while KIF/CL does not. michael On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 12:32:31 -0400 "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote: > > DaveH and I have a draft that could be reviewed in > the Tue telecon and sent off soon after: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_WL1 > > Based on Sandro's early response, I had prepared this: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_OK > (I had suggested -- part of -- our response should > be text for one of our specs, BLD or perhaps FLD) > > And we still have one open one: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_RAK > > -- Harold > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Chris Welty > Sent: October 14, 2008 10:04 PM > To: Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail) > Subject: Public comments EP1, WL1, AR2, RAK > > > > I've created wiki pages for the outstanding public comments. > > EP1 and AR2 are ready to go. I'll send Thurs. unless I hear otherwise. > > Harold, you and DaveH wanted to respond to WL1. > > Christian, you wanted to respond to RAK. > > -Chris >
Received on Saturday, 25 October 2008 17:09:39 UTC