Re: [OEP] New edition of time ontology editor's draft on 18 May 2006

Hi Ralph,

> You didn't comment about the Time Zone draft  [2], and Feng
> did not indicate when I asked in [3] whether he expected to
> make any updates to that document.

As for the Time Zone draft, we have already addressed all the previous comments
in the current version [2], and have been waiting for Guus' comments.

I didn't answer your question in [3] because you already asked in [3] "Guus, I
guess we're in need of your followup review comments on this draft", and that's
also what we have been waiting for in order to further update the document.
 
> Perhaps (as someone else suggested) the Time Zone document
> could be merged with the Time Ontology document as an appendix?
> What do you think, Feng?

I think I will need to ask Jerry about it after he's back, but Chris
summerized it very well in [4] why we decided to split those into two:

"Feng decided to split the notes into two, one describing the time ontology
and another describing just time zones, since they are actually broken
into two ontologies anyway.  I agree with Feng & Jerry that this makes
sense, as the time zone ontology is usable by itself, without having to
understand the time ontology."

Thanks!

Feng

>    [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/Time-Zone-20060418
>    [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Jun/0040.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0091.html

--
Feng Pan, Ph.D. Candidate
USC Information Sciences Institute (ISI)
Email: pan@isi.edu
Web: http://www.isi.edu/~pan/

Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2006 14:53:09 UTC