Re: proposal to close comments from semantics review

Brian,

See my comments below for each message that you mention.

>Herman,
>
>First of all thank you for the effort and exemplary attention to detail 
>you have put into the review of the RDFCore semantics and other 
documents.
>
>In the course of your review you have made a number of comments, 
including:
>

>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0131.html
OK

>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0117.html
There is one point about which I have just sent a new message.

>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0112.html
OK
However, Pat sent a second reply
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0132.html
indicating that he did an uniformization operation on all entailment rules 

tables.  This is a textually large change on a very important part of 
the text.
It might be wise if other people look at it as well.

>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0102.html
The reply made by Pat to fix the proof of the rdfs entailment lemma
helps a lot, but there remains a point about which I have just sent
a new message.

>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0052.html
This can be viewed as being earlier in the same line as 102, so see my 
previous comment.

>
>to which Pat has variously responded and updated the semantics document 
>as in the current editors WD:
>
>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/
>
>Can you reply to this message please, copy www-rdf-comments@w3.org, to 
>confirm that your comments have been satisfactorily addressed.
>
>Brian
>
>
>

Herman
>

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 09:10:01 UTC