Re: CHAIR-NOTE: Defaults and etc.

>
>  > and a number of other things we think are desirable, but don't
>>  necessarily have consensus on.  If we cannot reach consensus
>>  reasonably soon, my decision will be forced to be that we go with
>>  what DAML+OIL does (mandated by our charter) and move on.
>
>W3C process doesn't work that way. The chair can't decide
>the design.
>



Dan - I didn't mean to imply that I got to decide anything that is 
not explicitely delegated to me as chair, sorry if I led you to 
misinterpret.  What I meant when I said "mandated by our charter" was 
that our charter says

  The Working Group shall start by evaluating the technical solutions 
proposed in
  the DAML+OIL draft. If in this process the Working Group finds solutions that
  are agreed to be improvements over solutions suggested by DAML+OIL, those
  improved solutions should be used.

and that it is my job as chair to help us stick to this charter.  The 
point is that where we don't achieve consensus, then we cannot agree 
that these solutions are improvements, and therefore they should not 
be used.  IN short, what I'm doing is restating what I've said since 
the beginning, but let us diverge a little too far from -- this WG 
was chartered to start from DAML+OIL not from scratch.  Major 
departures from D+O are only legitimized by the clause above, but it 
is in turn conditionalized by us reaching agreement that something is 
an improvement.

So what I am trying to do is exactly to follow W3C process, not to 
depart from it at all!
  -JH
p.s. In a separate mailing I will address your objections to the 
example I used.  I don't think we are in substantial disagreement..


-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland		  College Park, MD 20742
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler

Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 23:55:02 UTC