- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:06:49 -0500
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, janet@w3.org, bert@w3.org, em@w3.org, liam@w3.org, www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> Subject: Re: review of XML in 10 points [was: AGENDA...] Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:20:10 -0600 > "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote: > [...] > > As of 13 November 2001 time several relevant W3C groups were in existence, > > including the Semantic Web Coordination Group, the RDF Core Working Group, > > and the Web Ontology Working Group, but I do not believe that the paragraph > > was passed by any of them for comments until yesterday. > > And then only because you happened to notice it, not > really because we invited review... Actually it was passed by the SWCG in an e-mail message, so there was some official review. I'm not sure who initiated the review. > > Now I hear that > > this document is supposed to be printed in large numbers this weekend for > > distribution next week. Wouldn't it have been nice to give those who might > > know something about the topic more time to work on a better wording? > > Yes, it would. Your point is well made. But again, it's not > constructive. I don't have a time machine to go back > and do that. Hopefully changes can be made for similar stuff in the future, which is why I brought this up. > If you feel that disseminating this information in this > form would cause more harm than good -- and I might agree -- > I can probably kill the idea of printing it and handing > it out at the conference. > > Or I could probably get the RDF/SW stuff deleted from > "XML in 10 points" altogether before it's printed. I definitely feel that it is a good idea to get some SW in there ... > Or you could phone me and we could work on better wording > urgently (50 min left in my workday today). There's > some chance of working on it tomorrow. ... so I'm willing to put some effort in it. A phone call now is not in the cards, as I have other things to do just now. I'll try to put together a modification this evening though. > There are any number of ways to move forward; I'll > see what I can do about them. > > But please let's trust that everybody's doing their > level best here, OK? There are a lot of working > groups, a lot of conferences, and a lot of web > pages to keep in sync. Agreed, but one would think that the RDF Core WG, at least, would be on the A-list for new stuff in a very popular document for changes that first bring RDF into the document. > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ peter
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 19:10:52 UTC