- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:19:51 +0000
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > In the absence of arguments that this change is editorial and not substantive, > I ask that the chairs reopen the PR decision, in order to consider the > resolution of Herman's last call comments which triggered this change. As I recall, Pat is travelling in the early part of this week. This will hamper clarification of this issue. The suggestion is that a substantive change, i.e. one visible in a test case, has been inadvertently made without consulting the WG. If true, that is unfortunate. However, I suggest the barrier to reopening the PR decision is quite high. Procedural irregularity is not enough. Lets address substantive matters. - Are you saying that HP cannot live with the current specifications? > > [This is nullified if Pat or others, can make a compelling case that I have > misunderstood the situation, and the correct understanding of the two test > cases is the same in both LC2 semantics and the current editors draft] This suggests that HP can live with the current situation. Brian
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 07:20:11 UTC