Re: Replace outdated social models in OWL2 primer

pá 21. 3. 2025 v 13:35 odesílatel Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> napsal:

> 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


Seems incredibly clear:

"If there is any doubt or disagreement as to whether a change functionally
affects interpretation, that change does not fall into this class."


>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>