- From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 13:31:30 +0100
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 2025-03-21 12:39, Marco Neumann wrote:
> I like the idea of a Community Group to work on examples as proposed by
> Ivan (and one not just for the OWL2 Primer examples). The request
> by Harshvardhan for examples that have "no issues or over which no
> social, ethical, or political discussions are necessary for the adopter
> as the goal" requires more changes than what is described by Sarven as
> "to appear to fall under Class 2". I would find it problematic to
> classify the proposed changes as editorial errors ("minor typographical
> correction").
Has anyone suggested that proposed changes are "minor typographical
correction" in any way?
As far as I can tell, the proposed changes are about the examples in
owl-primer (and nothing else) and it is important to understand where
that fits within the Process and everything else in order to assess how
the changes can be conducted.
Once again:
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#revised-rec-editorial
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#erratum
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#correction-classes
What was outlined is that the proposed changes appear to fall under:
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#class-2
which is classified as an "editorial change":
https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#editorial-change
Quite literally, as far as I can tell.
-Sarven
https://csarven.ca/#i
Received on Friday, 21 March 2025 12:31:36 UTC