- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 15 Nov 2002 12:42:19 -0600
- To: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
- Cc: W3C Web Ontology WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 2002-11-15 at 12:20, Leo Obrst wrote: > > Many of our documents have the title: "Web Ontology Language (OWL) ...". > Did we make a decision to NOT expand the acronym correctly? I thought we decided that was the correct expansion, or that we delegated to the editors or some such, but upon review of the records, I'm compelled to agree: the published WDs conflict with our decision record: "RESOLVED: We will call the language OWL (Ontology Web Language)" -- Minutes 3rd January 2002 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jan/0033.html ("How did he find that?" you might ask; well, I remembered we talked about the name at the 1st ftf; so I went to the history section of the WG homepage http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/#L109 and reviewed the records of the Jan 2002 ftf. Didn't find it there, but checked the telcons following it, and bingo, there it is.) I kinda like the way the WDs are, so I'm interested in re-opening that decision. Hm... is the fact that the WDs are now published and I (among others) like it sufficient new information to revisit the decision, Mr. Chair? Or shall we instruct the editors to fix the WDs w.r.t. our decision record? > Thanks, > Leo -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 15 November 2002 13:42:44 UTC