Re: Timeline

> >It is unclear how many of Herman's review comments on AS&S have been 
> >addressed.
> 
> Herman - same comment as to the above - most of your comments are 
> editorial, and are just waiting for Peter to get around to them. 
> Please pull out those you think effect the design of the language

See also my preceding mail I just sent [1].

There are no comments with effect on the design of the language.
The main objection deals with the RDF characterization of 
OWL DL and OWL Lite, for which Jeremy is now making an
alternative proposal.

However, many other comments aim to help to make the mathematical 
details of the semantics correct, and are not simply editorial comments.

That WebOnt needs to do this kind of work can be illustrated with a 
comment
from Pat listed in the log of the Bristol face-to-face meeting
of WebOnt:
> 09:17:32 [DanC] 
PatH: yes, the correspondence between entailment on abstract syntax 
and entailment on the triples is to be carried forward, and to 
be checked carefully. 

If the design of the language would be all that matters, then WebOnt
could have gone to Last Call before dealing with mathematical
semantics at all.

> 
> >These all may require changes in the AS&S, and many of these changes 
> >may be distasteful to the editor - this is unlikely to speed the 
> >process.

I recognize this comment by Jeremy.

> 
> I'm tempted to send both of you to the time out corner -- there's a 
> certain kindergarten dynamics at work here :-<
> 

I believe that this is not completely fair to Jeremy and me.

Herman

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0131.html

Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 10:03:07 UTC