RE: meeting record: 2004-11-18 SWBPD telecon

Hi Holger,

I wondering if you are referring to something I said on the telecon.  I couldn't tell because you didn't give a reference to where you read the statement concerned.  If it was me and I was interpretted as suggesting that there is a bug in Protégé I mispoke; I meant that we are having a problem with Protégé but haven't yet determined for certain whether it is a problem with Protégé or us.

In any case I agree with you; those of us who benefit from the efforts of those who provide high quality free software such as Protégé owe a duty to report issues back to the developers.  Having been on the receiving end of some less than helpful bug reports, I also think we owe have a duty to be as helpful as possible and try to isolate the simplest circumstances in which the bug occurs.

Viral, A student working with me has reported a problem to me with the Wordnet schema when we mix the Owl and RDFS portions in the same file.  Viral spent a lot of time Friday trying to track the problem down, but hasn't got there yet.  I haven't had time to try to isolate the cause of the problem and check if its something we are doing.  If it does turn out to be a problem with Protégé, we'll report it.

However, you have reminded me that I owe you another report that I have isolated.  I'll send that to the protégé list as soon as I've sent this.

Brian


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Holger Knublauch
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 9:41 PM
> To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: meeting record: 2004-11-18 SWBPD telecon
> 
> 
> I just read that someone stated Protege-OWL is buggy (especially
> with respect to mixing OWL and RDF).  It would help us (and the
> community) very much if those users could send bug reports to
> either me or (better) the protege-owl@smi.stanford.edu list.
> 
> Also, I did quite a lot of low-level work on RDF support in Protege
> recently, and this stuff is not in the 2.1 release (3.0 is 
> recommended).
> 
> Thanks
> Holger
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ralph R. Swick
> > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 12:21 PM
> > To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
> > Subject: meeting record: 2004-11-18 SWBPD telecon
> > 
> > 
> > Minutes from the irc log [1] attached.  Thanks to Brian for 
> > the irc transcript.
> > 
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/11/18-swbp-irc
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 20 November 2004 11:29:20 UTC