Re: Replace outdated social models in OWL2 primer

pá 21. 3. 2025 v 14:34 odesílatel Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> napsal:

> On 2025-03-21 13:48, Dan Brickley wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 12:45 Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com
> > <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >     pá 21. 3. 2025 v 13:35 odesílatel Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca
> >     <mailto:info@csarven.ca>> napsal:
>
> >         What was outlined is that the proposed changes appear to fall
> under:
> >
> >         https://www.w3.org/policies/process/#class-2 <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."
> >
> >
> > So anyone in the world could swing the classification with a single
> > email, then?
>
> I'd certainly hope not, especially when the commenter may have
> misinterpreted the text.
>

Hi Sarven,

Thanks for clarifying your perspective. Just to reiterate clearly from the
Process document:

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

Marco explicitly raised doubt about classifying these changes as editorial.
Therefore, regardless of how we individually interpret the specifics, the
existence of this disagreement itself moves it beyond Class 2.

I appreciate your point that Primer examples are non-normative, but the
Process document explicitly accounts for situations like this. It might
indeed seem strict, but that's exactly the policy we're meant to follow.

Hope this helps!


>
> But, just to respond to the earlier comment:
>
> Changing the examples in a Primer does not affect the functional
> interpretation or requirements, either within the document itself or in
> the technical reports it references. The examples in the Primer are
> non-normative.
>
> The statement in class 2:
>
>  >Examples of changes in this class include correcting non-normative
> examples which clearly conflict with normative requirements, clarifying
> informative use cases or other non-normative text, fixing typos or
> grammatical errors where the change does not change requirements.
>
> is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather a set of examples from
> which similar cases can be extrapolated.
>
> Errata, as per the Process, covers correction classes 1-3. Changing some
> of the examples certainly do not fall under correction classes 1, 4, or 5.
>
> Irrespective of whether the proposed changes fall under correction class
> 2 or 3, the bottom line remains the same. Errata / Editorial changes.
>
> -Sarven
> https://csarven.ca/#i
>
>
>